In Brief
- No Disciplinary Action: The Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago (LATT) has ruled that PNM Chairman and attorney Marvin Gonzales will not be referred to its Disciplinary Committee for publicly burning a Court Order.
- Strong Rebuke: While ruling out formal charges under the Legal Profession Act, the LATT Council condemned the act as ‘distasteful, unbecoming, and unnecessarily performative.’
- The Background: The decision follows a formal complaint by former LATT Council member Aaron Mahabir after Gonzales burnt a Court Order tied to a TTPS unexplained-wealth enquiry at Balisier House on 23 July 2026.
Caption: Marvin Gonzales
By Prior Beharry
The Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago (LATT) has decided that nothing arising out of the public burning of a Court Order by attorney and People’s National Movement (PNM) Chairman Marvin Gonzales will be referred to its Disciplinary Committee.
However, while sparing Gonzales formal disciplinary proceedings, the Council of the Law Association strongly reprimanded the act, describing the burning of the court document as “distasteful, unbecoming, and unnecessarily performative conduct on the part of an Attorney-at-Law.”
The position was outlined in an official response from LATT President Lynette Seebaran-Suite, SC, to fellow attorney and former LATT Council member Aaron Mahabir, who had written to the Association calling for an intervention and possible disciplinary scrutiny.
No referral under the Legal Profession Act
In her response to Mahabir on Tuesday, Seebaran-Suite stated that the Council gave “full and careful consideration” to the law and applicable legal authorities regarding what constitutes a disciplinary offence under the Legal Profession Act (Chap. 90:03), the Code of Ethics, and the common-law offence of scandalising the court.
“Having given the matter careful and considered attention, Council has advised the President that nothing arising from this matter should be directed to the Disciplinary Committee, and the President will accordingly not exercise her power under Section 37 of the Act to make a referral in this instance,” Seebaran-Suite wrote.
Despite the decision not to prosecute the matter before the Disciplinary Committee, the LATT President made it clear that the body disapproved of Gonzales’s actions.
“The Council, however, wishes to place on record that it does not condone the conduct in question,” Seebaran-Suite stated.
The Balisier House incident
The controversy stems from an incident on Thursday, 23 July 2026, at the PNM’s headquarters at Balisier House, Port of Spain.
According to Mahabir’s letter to the LATT – dated 31 July 2026 – Gonzales stood before an audience of party supporters and television cameras and set fire to a Court Order.
The Order had been served on the political party in connection with a court-sanctioned enquiry into the construction of the party’s headquarters, stemming from an unexplained-wealth investigation conducted by the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service (TTPS).
Before setting the document alight, Gonzales reportedly told supporters that the party would not be intimidated and that the Court Order would not be permitted to “desecrate the grounds” upon which the party was built.
Mahabir’s call for accountability
In his letter to Seebaran-Suite, Mahabir – who previously served on the LATT Council for six years – expressed concern that a matter of “real consequence” to the legal fraternity had gone unanswered.
Mahabir had requested that the Council consider three specific actions:
Issuing a public statement on whether publicly burning a Court Order is consistent with the standards, ethics, and obligations of an Attorney-at-Law in Trinidad and Tobago.
Clarifying for the public’s benefit the profession’s position on the sanctity of Court Orders, and the obligation of every attorney – regardless of the office they hold outside the profession – to uphold rather than undermine the authority of the Courts.
Considering whether the matter warranted further examination by the Association’s disciplinary or complaints mechanisms.
Mahabir noted that he made the request in a spirit of collegiality and in the genuine belief that a timely statement would protect both the legal profession’s standing and public confidence in the administration of justice.
