JCCCS and gov’t head to court in West Bridge matter

Construction on the project has already started and the bridge has been demolished
Construction on the project has already started and the bridge has been demolished

The controversy surrounding the contract for the West Bridge Project and associated works in Roseau is heading to court today, Tuesday, Chairman of the Joint Consultative Committee on the Construction Sector (JCCCS) Tony Le Blanc has confirmed.

Le Blanc said on Tuesday morning that officials from the government and JCCCS will be in court to be given directions in the matter.

“Among those served are Minister of Finance, Minister of Public Works, PS Public Works, Chief Procurement Officer and Members of the Central Procurement Board,” Le Blanc said.

The JCCCS and the government have been at loggerheads after the organization raised concerns over the manner in which the project was given to a Barbados-based company, saying the contract was not tendered in line with the Public Procurement and Contract Administration Act.

The JCCCS had given the government until 4:00 pm on Thursday, June 2 to respond to concerns raised on the matter or face court action. It was the second deadline given, the first was on May 25, but the government asked for more time.

The government is claiming the contract was legal based on the fact that a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), for works for the development of Roseau, including the reconstruction of the West Bridge, existed before the Act came into force in 2015 and the matter was an emergency after Tropical Storm Erika which had to be addressed.

Senior Counsel Tony Astaphan has argued that the MOU was “a notorious fact of public knowledge” and said action by the JCCCS was disrespectful.

The $18-million contract was signed between NSG Management and Technical Services Limited of Barbados, on Wednesday, April13, 2016, covering the demolition and reconstruction of the bridge, the dredging of the Roseau River between the Dominica China Friendship Bridge and the E.C. Loblack Bridge, the reconstruction of retaining walls and drainage works between the West Bridge and the E.C. Loblack Bridge and the demolition and reconstruction of the West Bridge.

Meanwhile, construction on the project has started and the bridge has been demolished.

Copyright 2012 Dominica News Online, DURAVISION INC. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed.

Disclaimer: The comments posted do not necessarily reflect the views of DominicaNewsOnline.com and its parent company or any individual staff member. All comments are posted subject to approval by DominicaNewsOnline.com. We never censor based on political or ideological points of view, but we do try to maintain a sensible balance between free speech and responsible moderating.

We will delete comments that:

  • contain any material which violates or infringes the rights of any person, are defamatory or harassing or are purely ad hominem attacks
  • a reasonable person would consider abusive or profane
  • contain material which violates or encourages others to violate any applicable law
  • promote prejudice or prejudicial hatred of any kind
  • refer to people arrested or charged with a crime as though they had been found guilty
  • contain links to "chain letters", pornographic or obscene movies or graphic images
  • are off-topic and/or excessively long

See our full comment/user policy/agreement.

22 Comments

  1. Tell the Facts
    July 7, 2016

    That $18M hurts them. They want it at all costs. What will they not do to get their hands on it?
    Money – the root of all evil. :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
    JCCC’S you are an embarrassment to your country.

  2. South City
    July 7, 2016

    The Government can diversify the contractors because you don’t know who’s for the Government or not. Skerritt has soo many enemies and frenemies right now, they may try to sabotage the construction process.

  3. Anthony P. Ismael
    July 6, 2016

    Great! The government’s legal team is proficient at one thing only: Intimidating the weak and poor amongst us, who dare to criticize the “Dear Leader.” However, criminals and rapist walk Scott-Free all day long. These guys has “Balls” the size of grapefruits. I like it. I guess Tony was unsuccessful with his intimidation tactics this time around. Let’s see just what card he will play this time around.

  4. July 6, 2016

    Allyou didnt get the job because you are to slow, take the two big projects going on in DA at the moment the are at a standstill, who in their right minds would employ slow coaches.
    Get vex if allyou like its the truth.

  5. Favoured
    July 6, 2016

    I am not optimistic that anything will come out of this. The courts cannot be relied upon for true justice there is precedence to support my lack of confidence. I will not be surprised that 1) judicial review will be applied for, case will be delayed indefinitely while life goes on (Gon Emmanuel fire bombing; and the 43 charges against Steven Isidore etc 2) if the case goes on the court may rule that inspite of the facts stated the project is in the public interest /good/safety, therefore the court will not want to seem to be the one to stop the project, life goes on 3) the court may asked the jcccs to provide all the evidence and protect the minister of finance from providing any, since the court may be of the view that the minister may incriminate himself (remember the dual citizen case, French passport was not admissible). Or the court may send matter to arbitration ; settle quietly out of court remember land transfer deal with Matt and the bin and fertilizer bobol. Enough said.

  6. shame how
    July 6, 2016

    wasting time a built the bridge its not even a castle what a joke this is

  7. BEB
    July 5, 2016

    Every body knew that the bridge needed repairs or to be rebuilt. Let’s suppose{God forbid} that before that contract was signed, a bus laden with passengers would be passing on that bridge and suddenly the bridge collapsed and that bus went down into the river injuring a few passengers, then these same people who are protesting would definitely blame the Govt. and would advise the injured persons to sue the Govt. Let’s use another scenario. If the Govt. were to say, since that vehicle went down into the river, they are going to block both ends of the bridge in order to prevent another accident,since there are other alternatives to get in and out off the City, then these same sets of people again, would turn around and say to Govt. “free up Roseau, why block the bridge, build the bridge” What I’m trying to emply,one does not know when and how to please people

  8. Dominican
    July 5, 2016

    If the JCCS win their case, and I hope they do, it will be a hollow victory of sorts since by that time the new bridge will have been built and the contractor paid. Would the court order for it to be taken down? No, of course not. They will castigate the Govt. but Roosevelt Skerrit simply does not care. He will have achieved what he set out to do in the first place….and thumb his nose at the law in his usual manner. Even if the court were to impose a fine it would be we, the taxpayers, who foot the bill.

  9. July 5, 2016

    every thing about this project is notorious the fibbing lawyer who like to tell fibs with a straight face is notoriously notorious.

  10. jazz53
    July 5, 2016

    Notorious !!. Typically for some bad quality or deed.

  11. The Real Thing
    July 5, 2016

    Once again,AN MOU is NOT a legally binding contract Mr Senior counsel.

    • Me
      July 5, 2016

      Mr. Astaphan knows that but win or lose, he is the winner because he will get paid anyway. Ethics or morals do not come into it.

  12. jazz53
    July 5, 2016

    Notorious.Typically for some bad quality of deed.

  13. Observer
    July 5, 2016

    Well!! well!! well!! Tony is true to his words whilst his partner from the northeast, it is said is busy cashing in on the project. I always knew the best place to go for a legal determination of the same is in the court. No boots on the ground would have given the right and legal resolution of the issue at hand. Although I do not support their reasoning for the action, I however commend them for allowing level minded ness to take precedence over the political hogwash that is “the bridge must not be allowed to be constructed under the terms and conditions of the said contract. That having been said, I hope Tony and the JCCCS will remain alert to any move by government to heed the call by the Leader of the Opposition to grant the contract for the construction of the new “state of the art national hospital” at Marigot to a Marigot based contractor. I suppose that the only way to achieve this is not to advertise the job for public tender. What say you Tony? You agree not to tender?

    • Intelligence
      July 6, 2016

      your reasoning on this matter is spot on!! my good fellow

  14. Moi
    July 5, 2016

    Good … slug it out in court. I would like to know what is not in that MOU that a contract was needed. And if the Procurement Act even speaks to regulating MOU’s.

  15. R. Linton
    July 5, 2016

    Wow!! The JCCS really has BALLS…Thought they were bought re the construction on the Petite Savanne Housing Project… It seem the carrot dangling did not work. This is going to be interesting…Knowing that Government personnel never reaches the Court.

  16. Titiwi
    July 5, 2016

    I am pleased some clarity will will be thrown upon this matter. Despite learned counsel’s assertion an MOU is never a substitute for a contract. If it was there would be no need for a Memorandum Of Understanding in the first place. And if anything is disrespectful is the demolition of the bridge before a legal ruling is obtained, presenting the court with a fait accompli, with the spurious claim that it was an emergency. I look forward to proceedings with great interest.

  17. verna
    July 5, 2016

    that’s why they’re moving extremely slow on that project…hmm…

  18. Delvin Castro
    July 5, 2016

    Why are so many people taking the Govt to court? Do u realize tax payers paying for the case not skerrit personally? U should take Roosevelt skerrit to court not the Govt of Dominica. :?:

    • john Paul
      July 5, 2016

      Have You not noticed that there is no difference between Roosevelt Skeritt and the Government of Dominica? They are one and the same!
      It is called Dictatorship by ballot!

      • john Paul
        July 5, 2016

        Mr. Skeritt says “I only laugh when they talk about their tax money”

Post a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

:) :-D :wink: :( 8-O :lol: :-| :cry: 8) :-? :-P :-x :?: :oops: :twisted: :mrgreen: more »

 characters available