Gibraltar Corruption

Is there still Rule of Law in Gibraltar? Is there corruption in the local police?

Are employees' Human Rights protected? Is there a mafia in Gibraltar?

How corrupt are the Courts in Gibraltar? Is Entain a bad employer?

Collusion by GVC/Entain and its witnesses
All the Respondent's witness statements were written in perfect English, even though all of the Respondent's witnesses were foreigners, several with a poor quality of English language. At a significant number of occasions, Mr Martinez asked for “a five minute comfort break” to interrupt my cross-examination of the Respondent's witnesses when they started to say things that went against the Respondent's interests. These requests for “short comfort breaks” were clearly a code used to indicate to a witness that they should stop talking or rephrase their answer in a less damaging way. In a similar way, Mr Martinez repeatedly answered my questions for the Respondent's witnesses when the witness' answer might have been revealing.
Page 2110 C – H: Stef van Veen refers to a meeting in the Hassans' office where the person he was meeting, interviewing him, made him aware of evidence. This shows that witnesses were being led on, they were being guided towards certain evidence in a suggestive way. Page 2111 F – 2112 F: In his written witness statement, Stef wrote that I: “never to [his] knowledge [was] caused to be made to feel alarmed, humiliated, or distressed”, these are specific words from the Bullying at Work Act put in Mr van Veen's mouth by Hassans. My question to the witness about this is strangely enough answered by the Chairman who sees no problem in it.

Page 2393 A – C: I ask that Mr Martinez stops nodding to the Respondent's witness Yousri Amrani, encouraging him with an answer. It was typical to see that the Respondent's witnesses gave very evasive answers, did not remember anything that could work in my favour but did remember most things that work against my claims. The Respondent's witnesses were clearly well trained in what they could say and what to omit.

Page 2302 A – 2303 D: team leader Susana Martin states that her witness statement was made based on an interview with a Hassans' lawyer. I bring up identical paragraphs in Susana's and Danielle's witness statements, copied and pasted from one witness statement in the other. The Chairman waves my protest about this manipulation away. To me this shows that a significant effort was made by the Respondent to make sure that their witnesses were not putting anything that could be incriminating in their witness statements. This resulted in the creation of an alternative reality, me being a bad employee and troublemaker, which at no point is reflected in the contemporary evidence.

Page 2303 D – 2305 F: Susana Martin had earlier denied that she had colluded with Danielle Wood from HR regarding their witness statements, but now I point out that after filing my Claim Form, Susana Martin had forwarded her evidence to Danielle Wood. Page 2527 B – 2529 F: Danielle Wood states that she collated all the evidence from the different witnesses in the company. As Danielle Wood was the one who never stopped the bullying, which was negligence, she had a motive to manipulate evidence. The Chairman sees no problem in this.

“They're parked until we can find a way around it. I don't think Government is necessarily comfortable with the situation because, from an access to justice issue, it does create a problem.”

All information published in this website is in the public domain or reflects the opinion of the author. As such this website's content is protected by Art 10. of the Gibraltar Constitution Order 2006, Protection of freedom of expression:
"Except with his own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, that is to say, freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference."