BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – BE it that he cannot answer or he refuses to do so, Minister of Foreign Affairs the Hon. Patrice Nisbett has failed to answer pertinent questions surrounding the recently ventilated Iranian/St. Kitts-Nevis diplomatic passport issue even after being approached by this publication.
Yesterday (Dec. 2), SKNVibes made contact with the Foreign Affairs Minister and a number of questions were posed to him, including whether or not Iranian Alireza Moghadam did pay $1 000 000 for the diplomatic passport and whether or not he is still a holder of that travel document.
SKNVibes asked Nisbett if he can indicate if the monies were accepted for the passport that Moghadam possessed and to whom the monies were paid, if indeed such a transaction took place.
An overtly defensive Nisbett said he could not respond to “an allegation” but advised that former Minister of Foreign Affairs the Hon. Sam Condor should be asked about the situation as the passport was issued during his tenure in that capacity.
“You want me to respond to an allegation? Who made the allegation? I don’t know. I can’t respond to that. I can’t respond to an allegation like that. Anybody could just say anything…I can’t respond to that, I don’t know… I can’t respond to something like that.
“You want me to respond to an allegation? In other words you want me to go do what, do guess work or something? I can’t respond to that! Maybe you need to ask Mr. Sam Condor about that because he was the Minister of Foreign Affairs at the time the passport was given. So it wasn’t given when I was the Minister.”
Yes, Minister Nisbett indicated that he could not respond to “an allegation” but when Iranian/St. Kitts-Nevis diplomatic passport issue first surfaced, it was but “an allegation” to which he responded via a Parliamentary address.
And that address clearly explained that Moghadam was issued a diplomatic passport and that he was a special envoy to Turkey and Azerbaijan. But it was found seriously deficient as he did not address a number of related questions.
Even after being reminded that he addressed “diplomatic passport allegation” while speaking in the highest court of the land, Min. Nisbett maintained that he could not address the $1 000 000/diplomatic passport allegation.
“Ma’am I cannot respond to an allegation, I can’t respond to it because I don’t know what I goin’ say. I can’t respond to an allegation like that.”
He advised that if this publication has “credible evidence in relation to the matter, you bring it forward…”
Nisbett further advised that the statement he made in Parliament “speaks for itself” and that he would not be answering any further questions to that end.
The expectation or even the practice is that an investigation would be launched into the circumstances surrounding the incident and appropriate action be taken to remedy any of the repercussions which have resulted from the incident. Whether that is being done or it would be done is left to be seen.
