Former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum has asserted that discussions he had with suspended Director of Public Prosecutions Christopher Pryde were unrelated to any investigations being conducted against him by the Criminal Investigations Department. During a court appearance, Sayed-Khaiyum clarified that their conversation revolved around personal matters concerning their families, specifically their children, Emma and Ibrahim.
He emphasized that the assertion that he spoke exclusively with Pryde is misleading. Sayed-Khaiyum noted that he was engaged in conversation with several individuals present, including ambassadors and members of parliament, and that any implication of improper conduct is unfounded. He expressed discontent with how a specific photograph was presented in court, arguing that it only captured a close-up of himself and Pryde without showing the broader context of others nearby.
Sayed-Khaiyum could not specify the duration of their discussion but maintained it was not merely a brief greeting; rather, it was a substantive dialogue amidst a social gathering. When questioned about potential discussions regarding his case, he firmly denied any such conversations took place, reiterating his commitment to ethical behavior.
Addressing another allegation concerning the payment of superannuation to Pryde—reportedly set at US$1000 per month without proper approval—Sayed-Khaiyum suggested it was a matter for the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) to investigate. He remarked that while he, as Attorney-General, generally oversaw such matters, he did not recall specific payments to all Constitutional Office Holders, emphasizing that formal processes outlined in the Constitution must be adhered to.
He also pointed out perceived contradictions in the claims against him by highlighting relationships between other officials under investigation, thereby advocating for accountability across the board.
The tribunal is currently examining the allegations of misbehavior, including the recommendation for Pryde’s removal as DPP. It’s notable that key dates were referenced, indicating ongoing scrutiny of both Sayed-Khaiyum and Pryde’s conduct amidst serious inquiries.
The case will continue to unfold as it has been adjourned until tomorrow morning. This situation raises critical questions about transparency and ethics in public office. The proceedings could lead to important clarifications regarding governance and the enforcement of accountability mechanisms, fostering hope for a more transparent judicial process in the future.
Summary: Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum defended his discussions with suspended DPP Christopher Pryde in court, claiming they were personal, not related to investigations. He addressed allegations about improper payments to Pryde, asserting these should be resolved by the Judicial Services Commission and highlighted broader accountability among officials. The tribunal continues to review these allegations, suggesting the potential for stronger oversight in public service.
Leave a comment