Lloyd Noel is a former Attorney General of Grenada, prominent attorney at law and political commentator

Another, also very real, possibility that could just as likely, or more than likely, attract the above headline is the old adage that “whatever wrong or questionable deeds that are done in the dark will one day, someday, come out in the light”.

On the other side of the same coin, as one looks back at the happenings in late 2004 and early 2005, relating to the impasse between the government of Grenada and the People’s Republic of China on Taiwan, or as it is usually said, in retrospect.

It becomes even clearer now why the Taiwanese were being treated the way they were by our government which, all along before then, had always been so close to the administration in Taipei, and had received tremendous financial assistance from the Taiwanese in most aspects of the government’s performances.

Although I said it is clearer now why what happened did in fact happen in connection with the relationship between the government of Grenada and Taiwan, that is, of course, my opinion and you must form your own.

Readers may recall, that the government mouthpieces were saying after Ivan, that Taiwan was not interested in or prepared to offer the kind of substantial assistance the people of Grenada needed, after the ravages of Hurricane Ivan.

They were also saying that, when the Prime Minister had visited Taiwan earlier in 2004 or 2003, the government in Taipei had treated him with scant regard, not befitting for the political head of state of independent Grenada.

I had heard another side to that visit, which had to do with accountability for funds advanced to Grenada - whether as a loan or a grant-in-aid I was not sure.

However, Taiwan was unceremoniously kicked out of Grenada in early 2005, and later on that same year, diplomatic relations were reinstated with Mainland China and the rest to-date is history.

And whether it is just the hand of fate, or the good, bad or indifferent consequences flowing from ingratitude and lack of appreciation, or just an opportune reminder that the evils that men do live after them and many times come back to haunt them even during their lifetime, it seems more than passing strange, that the news about the US$28 million loans from the Taiwan bank to Grenada, should come to light a few days before the cricket stadium built by Communist China was handed over to the government of Grenada.

And talking about the handing over of the Keys Ceremony on Saturday 3rd February, it was nothing more or less than the hands of retribution that caused the national anthem of Taiwan to be played, rather than that of Mainland China.  Vengeance is mine, said the Lord.

According to a case filed in the US District Court in New York on the 28th March, 2006, The Export-Import Bank of The Republic of China on Taiwan (hereinafter “Ex-Im Bank”) sued the Government of Grenada on four loan agreements, entered into between July 1990 and November 2000 in the total sum of $28 million US.

The respective loans and the purposes for requesting the same make interesting reading. The first loan in July 1990 was in the sum of $10 million US, and the purpose was for finance for the general “commercial use” of Grenada.

The second loan in April 1997 was in the sum of $2 million US, and the purpose was for finance to develop Grenada’s “agricultural economy”.

The third loan in October 1997 was in the sum of $6 million US, and the purpose was “to construct a national stadium in Queens Park in Grenada” and to “rehabilitate the secondary roads in the Islands of Grenada and Carriacou”.

And the fourth loan in January 2000, with a promissory note issued in November 2000 by Grenada, was in the sum of US$10 million, and the purpose was for financing “to construct the National Stadium and the Ministerial Complex in Grenada”.

The terms in time to pay back and the interest on those loans were very generous.  The first and fourth loans were twenty years, and the other two for fifteen years; and for the first the interest was two percent and the others four and a half percent.

However, once there was default in payment of periodical interest and principal then the interest automatically rose to ten percent on all outstanding payments.

Grenada defaulted since April, 2004, at which time the balance of the four loans was US$20.25 million.

Efforts to get payments resumed failed, and Grenada broke off diplomatic relations with Taiwan in early 2005; but the case was not filed until March 28, 2006, in the New York Southern District.

The jurisdiction and the venue for the case was agreed by the parties, because Ex-Im Bank has a branch in New York.

Sullivan and Worcester law firm in Boston, USA, is appearing for the bank, and Donzell M. Tucker of Ashland Place in Brooklyn is appearing for the Government of Grenada.

It appears that Grenada admitted liability, and asserted a partial defence based solely on economic hardship, but that defence has been rejected by the courts in the USA.

Ex-Im Bank, through its lawyers, offered Grenada the opportunity to make counter-proposals in November 2006, so as to avoid summary judgment being entered by the court.

The proposals were sent to the Finance Minister, Hon. Anthony Boatswain, by Donzell Tucker at the time and a reply was requested by 10th December 2006.

No reply was sent so the bank filed for summary judgment on the 21st December to take effect on January 30, 2007.

On January 7, 2007, Donzell Tucker again wrote to Boatswain expressing the urgency of the matter, and the severe legal and embarrassing consequences in connection with the grant of a summary judgment.  That letter was copied to Hon. Elvin G. Nimrod, as Minister of Foreign Affairs and Attorney General.

To-date nothing has been seen to indicate that anything was done to forestall the summary judgment on 30th January 2007.

At the date of filing of the claim, the sum due and owing was US$21,586,057.38, plus interest at 10% which was being added at US$5,671.65 per day from July 2005 and continuing.

Readers based in Grenada, whose memories are not as short-lived as the general opinion usually tends to suggest, should recall that the government of Grenada, through the relevant minister, had publicly informed the people that Taiwan had paid for the Stadium on one occasion; and on a second occasion, after the US$100 million bond loan was obtained from Miami in the USA., that the stadium was paid for from that loan.

Again, on the George Grant Sunday a.m. radio programme a few weeks ago, the minister for finance informed the nation, that monies were borrowed from “Ex-Im Bank” in Taiwan and the Taiwanese government has agreed to pay off that loan on behalf of the Grenada Government.

Mr Boatswain did not say when the Taiwanese government had made that promise, but he was in receipt of the letter of the 30th November 2006, sent to him by Donzell M.  Tucker from New York, which letter came from the Ex-Im Bank lawyers offering Grenada the opportunity to make counter proposals and so avoid the summary judgment.

That letter stated in paragraph two thereof....  “Before setting out the basic terms on which the bank is prepared to settle the case, we point out and reiterate that the bank is an entity distinct from and independent of the government of the Republic of China.” In light of all the foregoing and the total absence of any indication after all this time that this debt was hanging over Grenadian’s head, what is the government’s answer to this continued abuse of its authority and contemptuous disregard for the people’s business and assets?

What is the point of all the fuss and more expenditure to celebrate independence, when the people’s rights and freedoms are being trampled upon every passing day?

Independence was not the flag, and the anthem, and the name “Independent Grenada.” The election of fifteen men/woman to sit in a building called parliament and make decisions and pass laws for others, (not them) to obey is not independence.

The Independence Constitution was passed in London and adopted in Grenada on the people’s behalf as the road map, the tried and tested guidelines to point out the ways and means to ensure peace and stability.

In today’s so-called Independent Grenada, the only aspect of all the conferences, and discussions, and struggles, that surrounded the onset of terminating our association with England in February 1974, is the freedom from the control and direction, of the colonial masters in London.

In its place, we are now saddled with a kind, and level, and scope of disregard and abuse of power and authority that is really and truly unbelievable.

But for one reason or another, or maybe for no reason at all, our people seem to be taking it all in their stride and carrying on regardless.

I know very many are saying ...  “God is good and He will end it someday.” That is very true, am sure, but we are all expected, even if we had a “Grenadian God,” to help ourselves.

Because the longer the destruction continues, and the deeper the hole of instability and indebtedness, the very much harder and more difficult it will be to extricate ourselves, when the day of reckoning does come.

Hence the ongoing cry - when will it ever end?