Guest commentary: Rowley playing high stakes game. Would he walk away on losing?

The Honourable Leader of the Opposition, Dr. Keith Rowley, has presented a string of 31 emails from one unnamed source seeking to impugn the government’s credibility on the Section 34 issue but his numbers don’t seem to add up. 

As a person seeking to be the next prime minster of this country one would expect that in his official actions he would display certain basic qualities such as circumspection, respect for the country’s office holders, respect for our international reputation and relationships and most of all respect for our people and their Parliament. 

As the next few days and weeks progress I am sure that a lot more will be revealed on this e-mail issue. However, setting aside the question of the authenticity of the emails, there are certain important questions left unanswered in Dr. Rowley’s email “bombshell.”

There are sections of the society that remain with lurking doubts about whether they have received full disclosure on the Section 34 issue and for that section of the society the alleged emails revealed by Dr. Rowley may have a ring of truth. 

However, in our politics, the population has long come to realize that very few things can be taken at face value. It is for this reason that the reasonable citizen must have legitimate concerns about the veracity of Dr. Rowley’s revelations.

Accepting the press reports of Dr. Rowley’s presentation to the House as accurate, the following questions arise:

1. If in September 2012 he had reliable information that the life of reporter Denyse Renne was in danger, did he then inform her of this and did he make a report to the police so that they could provide her with the necessary protection? 
2. If in September 2012 he had reliable information that illegal bugs were planted in the office of the DPP, did he inform Mr. Gaspard of this so that at the very least, a sweep could be done to detect same and charge those responsible? 
3. If in September 2012 he had reliable information that there was a plot to bait and trick the DPP into giving up his office, did he inform the DPP of this? 
4. If in September 2012 he had reliable information that the Chief Justice and Chairman of the Judicial and Legal Services Commission (“JLSC”) was perceived to be pliable and accommodating to the Cabinet did he inform the Chief Justice or other members of the JLSC of this? 
5. If in September 2012 he had reliable information that there was a plot by senior government officials to accept bribes and thereby evade their treaty responsibilities to the Government of the United States did he inform the US Government of this? Did he not think it of the utmost urgency to bring this information to the DPP’s attention? 

All of these questions arise from Dr. Rowley’s presentation and unfortunately they were left unanswered.

As a responsible leader and aspiring Prime Minister one would think that Dr. Rowley would first test the credibility of his source before going public with such damning allegations against so many of our office-holders. But if he had belief in the credibility of his source then why wait six months before revealing this information to the country? 

Why wait six months before calling upon the DPP and Integrity Commission to investigate? Why did we not hear anything about these emails from the former President? 

The former President was certainly not perceived to be a friend of the present government. At the very least one would have expected mention of these emails in the former President’s now infamous “Section 81” letter.

If at the end of the day Dr. Rowley did not a reasonable belief in the veracity of his source and he did not believe that his information was reliable, it was highly irresponsible for him proceed as he did. 

It is highly improper to make allegations as serious as he made and not have a reasonable belief in same. At the end of the day it is the population that loses out since it is their business that has been deferred.

As one commentator has stated, Dr. Rowley is playing a game of high stakes poker where he has gone all in. Will he have to walk away from the table totally broke? I guess we will soon find out.

Larry N. Lalla

AG calls for public debate with Rowley

Anand Ramlogan in Parliament Monday

Attorney General Anand Ramlogan on Tuesday called for a public debate with Opposition Leader Keith Rowley "in front of all the media" on the issues raised Monday in Parliament during the debate on the opposition's no confidence in the government.

Ramlogan made the call during separate interviews on radio and television on the Guardian media networks. 

Rowley made allegations Monday that the Prime Minister, Ramlogan, Minister Suruj Rambachan and the PM's National Security Adviser Gary Griffith were involved in a conpsiracy to undermine the office of the DPP and to attack a journalist at the Guardian media.

Rowley presented a string of emails that he said contained incriminating evidence of the conspiracy. 

However Ramlogan, in his rebuttal in Parliament Monday, immediately drew attention to glaring inconsistencies in the documents presented by Rowley and made a categorical denial of all the contents of the emails. He called Rowley's behaviour reckless. He also challenged Rowley to make the accusations outside the Parliament where he would not have the protection of Parliamentary Privilege.

On Tuesday he again pointed out some of the discrepancies and said it is time that Rowley stop "talking foolishness". And he issued the public challenge for the debate.

Jack reveals critique of Concacaf's report; three independent jurists report on Simmons committee report

Jack Warner: "I have been a victim of a degree of intrigue and collusion of the highest level."

Jack Warner held a media conference at the Centre of Excellence Tuesday to reveal the findings of three jurists who have critiqued the Concacaf Integrity Report report.

The former National Security Minister resigned from Parliament two days after that report was made public, quit as chairman of the United National Congress (UNC) the day after and then resigned as MP for Chaguanas West.

He told reporters Tuesday that he received the opinion of three eminent legal minds  - Justice Zainool Hosein, Andrew Mitchell Q.C. and Bertram E. Commissiong Q.C. Each presented an individual report.

The former cabinet minister highlighted the key points noted by the legal team, noting that the men identified several things that were wrong with the Simmons report presented to Concacaf in Panama last month.

• The legal standards applied by the Committee were based on the balance of probabilities and not beyond a reasonable doubt as is expected in cases of a criminal nature yet it went on to make making findings of that same criminal nature
• The procedure used to gather information was flawed because it authorized Counsel to conduct necessary interviews in person, by telephone and without reference to the committee. Witnesses imparted their information without taking oath and in the absence of the members of the Committee who must now look at that information and make findings

Warner said one lawyer described this as "...a glaring case of condemnation, castigation and persecution without evidence and without due regard for fundamental and sacred pillars of justice, including particularly, the maxim ‘audi alteram partem (translated it should be heard by the other side).’”

He stated other areas of concerned noted by the legal team:

• A blatant abuse of the legal procedure known as the Salmon Letter which requires the accused to meet the accuser. These thirty-eight witnesses were unidentified and up to now as one lawyer pointed out one does not know what interests they have to protect and what is the quality of information they presented to serve those interests
• The Integrity Committee fell into error by wrongly purporting to act as a court of law. It did not have the power to summon or subpoena witnesses or punish for contempt and therefore it was improper of the Committee to make an adverse finding against a person who exercise his right in law not to participate
• The Investigating Committee ought to have been independent. However, they pointed out that “CONCACAF as part of the FIFA fabric has selected, sponsored and has employed the members of the Investigating Committee so it is plain that in the eyes of the party and a reasonable bystander that the independence of the Investigating Committee is compromised
• There was a deliberate plan to mislead as it relates to financial impropriety. Even though at paragraph 5.198 of the Report it clearly states that: “Warner frequently asked if the Executive Committee members had any questions about the financial statements, the members typically did not ask any such questions” yet the Report continues as though Jack Warner misrepresented financial records to the Executive Committee
• On the Centyre of Excellence. The lawyers concur that “The Congress which is made up of a delegation from each national member association is charged with the following duties: the approval of loans; the authorization of real estate purchases, sales, and mortgages exceeding $100,000 in value; and the approval of budgets and financial statements as presented by the Executive Committee. The lawyers noted that based on the information presented that the CONCACAF Executive Committee was never under the impression that the Centre of Excellence complex was a CONCACAF asset

Warner said while the Committee made clear pronouncements as to the culpability and his guilt the lawyers found that the evidence and the facts did not support such a conclusion.

"The conclusions appear to be driven by a desire to castigate, malign and punish rather than to present a true and fair representation of the state of affairs and or the circumstances surrounding a number of transactions addressed in the Committee’s report," he said. 

"The Committee did not see it fit to even check the books of the FIFA, audited by KPMG as always, and to see what the FIFA accounts said about the FIFA grant and later gift to Jack Warner."

Warner added that he has been "sanctioned, castigated and maligned; treated as guilty without due process or an investigation into the publication of documents to determine its veracity or validity."

He added, "I have been a victim of a degree of intrigue and collusion of the highest level perpetrated by some who believed that, exactly after three years to the date of the Fyzabad Accord, Jack Warner is expendable." He said he would have more to say about that "another time".

He cautioned the media to be careful of "how you condemn the present Government after Rowley’s so-called expose". He added, "Our Constitution does not place the burden of proof on the accused so let us in defence of our Constitution presume the innocence of all who are accused of wrongdoing until such guilt is established."

Warner has promised to print copies of the document for the electorate of Chaguanas West. He has planned to file nomination papers on Thursday to contest the vacant seat as a member of the UNC.

Warner has said that he remains committed to the People's Partnership government and that Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar is the best leader this country has ever had or is likely to have for a long time to come.

Letter: Too many discrepancies point to bogus emails

The glaring headlines this morning (Tuesday) gave the impression that some big scandal was being unearthed by the Opposition PNM to expose the Attorney General and the Prime Minister as being involved in acts of transgression. One paper even went so far as to compare it to “Watergate” with the headline “Emailgate”!

Since May 2010, the political playfield in this country has been transformed overnight into a frightful battlefield. The war between the two major political parties has been intensified. The People’s Partnership Government has been one of the hardest working Governments for the people of this nation and one only has to look around in their own communities to come to that conclusion.

However, while this Government is fighting the battle, undergoing many sleepless nights all in the interest of our citizens, the Opposition PNM is also working hard, but mind you, not for the benefit or interest of our citizens, but instead looking for ways and means to create political mischief and damage. How else can we explain the reasons behind the claims made by Leader of the Opposition in the Parliament yesterday when he opened the debate on his Motion of No Confidence?

Under the cover of Parliamentary Privilege, Dr. Rowley allegedly unearthed a trail of emails supposedly exposing a Section 34 scandal. Looking at the trail of emails in the newspaper, you can clearly see that this so called “scandal” is nothing but a figment of Dr. Rowley’s wild imagination. How else can we explain the countless inconsistencies in the email trail?

Among the many contradictions, I personally even tried to send an email to the address and it bounced back to me with the following message:

“Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently: anan@gmail.com.Technical details of permanent failure: Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the server for the recipient domain gmail.com by gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com. [2607:f8b0:4003:c01::1b].”

I urge everyone to try it themselves. I assumed Dr. Rowley would have checked it himself, but alas I was wrong!

To further illustrate the fact that what was said by Dr. Rowley holds no water and serves only to malign and assassinate the character of the Attorney General, I tried to create an email address with four characters and the Google support team prevented me from doing so. I got an official explanation by the Google support team saying that between 6-30 characters are needed. This explanation can be found at this link https://support.google.com/mail/answer/7993

It states that: “We've discovered that short usernames at popular domains receive significantly more spam since they're easy to automatically generate. Gmail's requirement that all usernames be at least six characters in length is meant to keep spam out of your inbox. (Dots or periods don't count as characters when creating your username.)”

Even further, Dr. Rowley purports to have an "email" having been sent from both "anan@gmail.com; anand@tstt.net.tt", I have asked my IT trained and qualified friends who said that this is virtually impossible.

The citizens of this land would be comforted with a Police investigation into this matter and holding those responsible to account for their atrocious misconduct in attempting to humiliate our Attorney General and Prime Minister. 

Dr. Rowley’s actions only serve to create doubt and mistrust of the Government by the people of this land and destroy the unequivocal faith we have in the Government. His actions show that his party will resort to doing ANYTHING, stoop to whatever depths in an attempt to regain the reins of power. It is unfortunate and a downright embarrassment to this nation that the political battlefield has come to this, absolutely no rules of morality by those in Opposition. They remain shameless, unprincipled and unethical.

It has now become a habit of Dr, Rowley to make statements without checking the facts and then he has to return and apologise. 

This incident is not different from those times in the past, a formal retraction and apology should be made in the house by the Dr. Rowley and I urge the people of this country not to be swayed by the Opposition Leader’s fabrications.
Risha Pragg | 29 Passiflora Drive, Roystonia Gardens, Couva

Government to Rowley: Authenticate emails presented in no confidence debate; PM asks CoP to investigate

Keith Rowley opens debate in his Parliamentary debate (Express Photo)

Keith Rowley opened the debate on his no confidence motion in the government Monday by producing what he said was a string of e-mails between top government members that reveal a conspiracy to undermine key state institutions and the media.

But in an immediate rebutall, Attorney General Anand Ramlogan dismissed the opposition leader's conspiracy theory as bogus.

And in a media release late Monday the Government formally refuted the allegations and Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar wrote to the acting police commissioner asking Stephen Williams to investigate "these very serious allegations and ascertain the authenticity of those emails and take such action as is required according to the Laws of Trinidad and Tobago."

The release from the office of the Prime Minister is reproduced below:

"The People's Partnership Government categorically refutes any authorship in the series of printouts of alleged electronic mails between members of the government during a period of September 2012. 

"The content of the print-outs as read into the Parliamentary debate this afternoon would be inadmissible under any general rule of evidence and we challenge the Leader of the Opposition to authenticate these messages.

"We also challenge the Opposition Leader to repeat these allegations outside the Parliament chamber and without the protection of the privilege he so skillfully abuses.

"The people of Trinidad and Tobago should take note that in this era of technology, it is easy to forge e-mail accounts, or to create accounts that are either very similar or appears to be an authentic existing email. 

"If a series of print outs, without any well-established electronic verification process, is the foundation of the Leader of the Opposition's No Confidence Motion in the Government, then the motion is being built on nothing more than a fictitious and fabricated paper foundation and adds nothing to the development of the People of Trinidad and Tobago.

"Both the public and the media should note the comments by the Speaker of the House during the debate, when he said that Members must take ownership and full responsibility for the content of all emails being read into the Hansard of House.

"The allegations made during the debate by members of the opposition are malicious, false, misleading, scandalous. It amounts to misleading the house and may even amount to a Contempt of Parliament.

"We note too that it points to a significant criminal act to have either concocted the emails or to have knowingly relied on such a malicious fabrication. That is indeed a matter that we would seek to investigate.

"The following is an extract from a letter sent by the Prime Minister, the Hon. Kamla Persad-Bissessar, SC, MP to the Acting Commissioner of Police, Mr Stephen Williams:

"Dear Commissioner,

"Today, Monday 20th May 2013, the Honourable Leader of the Opposition shared with the Government, correspondence which he stated came into his possession several months ago.

"The correspondence, purporting to be email exchanges between government office holders, alleges serious criminal conduct. I hereby request that you cause an investigation into these very serious allegations and ascertain the authenticity of those emails and take such action as is required according to the Laws of Trinidad and Tobago."

Rowley tells Parliament emails reveal major government conspiracy; AG, Anil knock down arguments

Rowley shows copies of emails; PP calls them bogus, calls for police probe

The PNM had promised something big in Monday's opposition no confidence motion. And in came from Keith Rowley, who read what he said was an exchange of emails alleging a conspiracy against the media and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in connection with the proclamation of Section 34.

The Opposition leader said there was a plot involving Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar, Attorney General Anand Ramlogan, National Security Adviser Gary Griffith and Local Government Minister Suruj Rambachan.

He said the string of emails show a plan to tap the phone of DPP Roger Gaspard, remove him from office, and smear a reporter. The allegations were repeated by opposition whip Marlene McDonald and Diego Martin Central MP Amery Browne who both heaped scorn on the People's Partnership government.

Rowley said he wants the DPP and the Integrity Commission to probe the e-mails purportedly bearing the names of PM and the others.

However, Ramlogan, who spoke immediately after Rowley, scoffed at the claims and pointed out that they were bogus.

Some of the emails that Rowley produced had the email anan@gmail.com. However Ramlogan pointed out that it could not be from him because he has never had a gmail account. He read into Hansard what he said was the only email that he has ever had: anand@tstt.net.tt 

The Attorney General called the motion of no confidence an abuse of parliamentary privilege, frivolous and a waste of parliament’s time. And he challenged Rowley to make the same allegations outside the legislature where he doesn't have the protection of Parliamentary Privilege. He said the claim was "pure and utter fabrication" and called it "an act of political desperation", adding that it was "nothing short of character assassination".

Ramlogan labelled Rowley a liar, pointing out several instances where he knowingly fabricated stories. The most prominent, he said, was when Rowley accused him of making racist remarks to staff at the T&T mission in New York. Rowley eventually apologised and acknowledged he was wrong.

Ramlogan also spoke of the PNM's false propaganda involving the government's case against BAE over the the cancellation of a contract to supply the T&T government with four offshore patrol boats. 

The PNM claimed publicly that the government had lost the arbitration matter and would have to pay tens of millions in compensation. It turned out to be the opposite and BAE had to pay the government more than $1Billion.

The AG said with today's technology it takes seconds for anyone to create an account and accused Rowley of irresponsibility in presenting the emails in Parliament without authenticating them.

In his presentation, Sports Minister Anil Roberts raised the same concern and said the opposition leader's motion was a waste of Parliament's time.

Roberts asked why the opposition leader had such "evidence" in his hand for six months without reporting the alleged conspiracy to the police. He noted that if the allegations are true then top government officials would be involved in a conspiracy that would be a criminal act so any responsible person with such information should take the matter to police.

He slammed the Opposition leader, who was absent for Roberts' presentation, for not making any attempt to get experts to verify whether the emails were genuine before coming to Parliament to accuse the PM and others.

He also took issue with charges that there was a plot against the media and noted several instances when the PNM were anti-media including the banning of a Newsday reporter from the Parliamentary Press gallery and a statement by MP Colm Imbert during the 2010 election campaign to"deal with the media". 

Roberts said while the opposition leader held on what he called false emails for six months without verifying if they were authentic he was able within six minutes to determine that were bogus, noting that one of them even had .con instead of the conventional .com.

Roberts also noted that one of the emails that Rowley read had a reference to the PM speaking to American official Thomas Smitham in September. He pointed that it was easy to spot the error since the purported email was dated September but Smitham arrived in Port of Spain in November to take up his duties.

Most of the emails had the address shown this way:

To: kamlapb1@gmail.com
From: anan@gmail.com

While the debate was in progress the Prime Minister called a media conference to announce that she had asked Acting Police Commissioner Williams investigate the authenticity of the emails and take action according to the law.

Persad-Bissessar said she was disappointed that Rowley said he shared the information with former President Max Richards and six months later had not asked police to investigate. The PM also said President Richards never raised the matter during meetings she had with him.

Anil calls on PNM to deal with Rowley

Anil Roberts used to be a member of the People's National Movement (PNM). However he left the party, joined the Congress of the People (COP) and was elected as the MP for D'Abadie O'Meara in the 2010 general election.
On Monday, the Sports Minister had some advice for his former party - deal with your leader.

Roberts was speaking in the debate in the House of Representatives in the motion of no confidence brought against the government. 

In leading off the debate Opposition Leader Keith Rowley produced a series of documents, which he said were incriminating emails exchanged among four people - Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar, Attorney General Anand Ramlogan, Local Government Minister Suruj Rambachan and the PM's National Security Adviser, Gary Griffith.

Rowley said the documents were proof of a sinister conspiracy to undermine the office of the DPP by tapping the phone of the DPP and having him promoted in order to get a new DPP. He also spoke of a plot to get the Guardian to kill a story and also to harm a journalist working with the paper.

On Tuesday Guardian Editor in Chief Judy Raymond stated that she is not aware of any attempt by the government to try to prevent publication of any story.

When Roberts spoke in Parliament on Monday he accused Rowley of bringing the Parliament into disrepute and shaming his party. And he called on the PNM to haul Rowley before its General Council and have him disciplined for abusing his office and the party.

Roberts said it was unbecoming of a politician holding such an important office to behave in such a reckless manner by presenting unsubstantiated allegations against key people in the government. He said all the documents had glaring evidence that the emails were fabricated, noting that it took him just six minutes to find them.

He asked why Rowley held on to such compelling evidence for six months if he honestly thought they were genuine documents.

Rowley was absent during the presentation by Roberts and for a few moments after Roberts took his seat it appeared that the debate was over. Opposition Whip Marlenet Mc Donald was not in her seat as well, Colm Imbert was absent, Rowley was nowhere to be seen and Speaker Wade mark announced that he would put the motion to a vote if the PNM did not wish to add to the debate.

There was some hesitation among the opposition benches before MP Amery Browne rose to present his contribution.

Photo story: UNC youth hold vigil in support of PM Kamla

Youths of the United National Congress braved the first rains of the rainy season to gather on the waterfront of the Parliament of Trinidad and Tobago to hold a one-hour candle light vigil to show support for Prime Minister Kamla Persad Bissessar.

Youth Arm Chairman Nicholas Morris led the group of about 70 individuals to form an arch on the waterfront with candles in hand and signs reading "full confidence in Prime Minister Kamla Persad Bissessar".

"The vigil was held to not only show resounding support and never ending confidence in the Prime Minister and Political Leader of the UNC but also that she represents the light of the land and became the light in the darkness for this nation when she became Prime Minister," Morris said in a media release.

Letter: PNM shames itself in no-confidence debate

This motion was a complete waste of time. 

I am disappointed in the Opposition yet again. They are wasting precious parliament time ...instead of bringing legislature or seeking to come to consensus on Bills they are bringing senseless, baseless, false, malicious and mischievous motions? 

I couldn't believe my ears when I realized that that was all there was to the motion, some fake emails that cannot be verified and glaringly fake!

I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw the PNM members refuse to stand up to talk when it was their turn! It proved that they had NOTHING. 

They proved that they wasted the country's time. Sure, the motion would be defeated...arithmetically but the PNM has been defeated BIG TIME.

This is the worst moment for them in history! Manning must be hanging his head in shame!

Jenna Thomas | St Joseph

Guest commentary: ROWLEY'S HAIL MARY PASS

By ROBIN Montano - reproduced from THE RAG

In American football there is a play that is referred to as a "Hail Mary pass". What happens is this: a touchdown is worth six points. It sometimes happens that one team is behind by, say, four points, and there is only enough time on the clock for the team that is behind to make one more play. 

If the team scores a touchdown on that play it wins the game. If it does not score ... well, that's it! They lose! Usually the quarterback of the team that is behind at this time throws the football to a receiver that is way downfield. If the receiver catches the ball a touchdown is certain. 

That is why it's called a 'Hail Mary' as when the ball is going through the air for those few interminable seconds you can almost hear the supporters of that team as well as the quarterback saying "Hail Mary, full of grace ...".

Dr. Keith Rowley's play in Parliament yesterday (Monday) could be labelled such a pass because if what he said turns out to be not true he will have effectively sunk himself and his PNM team. That would be it! Finito! Kaput! On the other hand, if all that he has said is true the Government is sunk!

Dr. Rowley showed clearly yesterday that he understood clearly that he simply had to come with something new for the no confidence motion that he was bringing. A simple re-hashing of past issues was not going to cut it. So he came up with some e mails that, if true, are so serious that they would bring the Government down, as I said earlier. 

The e mails basically allege a criminal conspiracy between the Prime Minister, the Attorney General and the Prime Minister's special security adviser, Captain Gary Griffith over the section 34 issue. Further the e mails go further to suggest that the parties involved were planning serious harm to a journalist.

The problem here is that the e mails appear on their very face to be faked. For example, a lot of the e mails are supposed to have come from an e mail address: anan@ gmail.com. But it is not possible to create a g mail account with less than six characters. So, that e mail address would have to be, say,anan12@gmail.com in order to be valid. (And as if to prove this my computer has highlighted and underlined the fake address that I just made up the way that it does whenever I type a real e mail or web address. It didn't do that for the "anan" address.) 

So, what are we to make of this? 

Then there is another e mail address that ends in ".coN "(I have high lighted and capitalised the "n" for emphasis). There should be an "m" where the "n"is. Then there is an alleged exchange of e mails between Captain Griffith and Mr. Ramlogan starting with Mr. Ramlogan allegedly e mailing Captain Griffith at 1:33am on a Monday morning and Captain Griffith replying at 1:40am! So? So these men don't sleep and are sitting on their computers at that time?! Really? I'm sorry. That doesn't make sense.

There are other things that lead me to believe that the e mails are faked, but hopefully you get the point. Then Dr. Rowley wants us to believe that he had this information for the last six months!? Really? 

So he is saying that he knew that there was a threat on the life of the journalist but did nothing about it?! What was he waiting for? For the woman to be killed and then he could say 'ah!Ha! Caught you!' In other words, scoring political points is more important than saving someone's life!?

(There are other things too. Did anyone notice, for example, that the Express published all the e mails with the adresses, except the ".con" address was deleted in their publication? I wonder why they did that? Hmmmm! Makes you think, doesn't it?)

But back to the erstwhile Leader of the Opposition. The accusations that he has made are very, very serious. The Prime Minister has quite properly referred them to the Commissioner of Police. 

If they turn out to be true the Prime Minister and her Attorney General will have to resign. There is no question of that! But if the accusations turn out to be false then Dr. Rowley should be expelled from the Parliament. This is much too serious to warrant a slight slap on the wrist or a mere suspension. No one should be allowed to make accusations like this in the Parliament ... the highest court in our land ... if they are not true. No one!