Mark Mingo (right) and his lawyer Geert Hatzmann entering the courthouse in December 2019.
O’Neal Arrindell
~ Appeals filed immediately ~
PHILIPSBURG--Former Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of St. Maarten Port Authority Mark Mingo and local businessman O’Neal Arrindell were both found guilty as charged in the so-called “Emerald II” investigation into large-scale fraud in Port St. Maarten.
The Court of First Instance sentenced Mingo (48) to 46 months in prison for forgery of documents and scamming Port St. Maarten for around US $10 million. He was also forbidden to work as a port director or at any government-owned company for a period of six years, the Court ruled Wednesday afternoon.
Mingo’s co-perpetrator in the scam, businessman O’Neal Arrindell (38), who was also found guilty of firearm possession, tax fraud and of bribing Member of Parliament Frans Richardson (see related story), was sentenced to 66 months in prison.
“The Court of First Instance considers the proven facts to be very harmful to the confidence the people of St. Maarten must be able to have in people in important positions, such as politicians and administrators of government companies. The actions of the suspects, on whom others depend and who are being looked up to, therefore also have an undermining influence on society,” the Court said in a brief press release on Wednesday afternoon.
The judge turned down the Prosecutor’s request to immediately incarcerate Mingo, Arrindell and Richardson, because their pre-trial detention had been suspended quite some time ago.
In October 2018, Mingo and Arrindell were charged with defrauding the Port of a total of $10 million. During the hearings in this case, which took place mid-December 2019, the Prosecutor called for seven years’ imprisonment for Arrindell.
Mingo would have to spend four years in prison and should be banned from being a board member of any government-owned company in St. Maarten for five years, the Prosecutor said at the time.
Arrindell only confessed to having had a gun in his possession during a house search on November 28, 2016. He said he had purchased the firearm to protect his family. He also confessed to having made “mistakes,” as he did not file his income tax return.
As to the other charges, the suspect proclaimed his innocence. “I did not swindle and did not do any side-deals,” he told the Court in his final word.
However, the Court found it proven that Mingo and Arrindell, together with other suspects, had defrauded the harbour of at least $7 million by signing 272 forged and falsified invoices between April 2012 and July 2017 for services rendered to the Port for trucking, clean-up and other work.
Mingo and Arrindell in collaboration had made bribes to Arrindell disappear in the business administration and had worked together in scamming the Port using Mingo’s financial power and Arrindell’s intimidating behaviour.
The Court agreed with the Prosecutor that the paid invoices concerned activities that were in reality not or only partly carried out for Port St. Maarten Group of Companies (PSGC), the former St. Maarten Harbour Group of Companies NV (SMHGC), St. Maarten Holding NV or St. Maarten Cruise Facilities NV.
The judge stated that it had not emerged from the administration of Arrindell’s businesses and the harbour companies that any work was actually done. “There is only a flow of invoices and payments, forming strong indications of forgery,” the judge said while reading out the sentences.
The lawyers for the defence had stated that not their clients, but others should be held responsible. However, construction companies for which the one-man contractors allegedly had carried out work said they did not know any of them.
Also, the Court did not believe that the Port’s supervisory board was also involved. “The payments made to the contractors were just under the limit above which control by the board was required,” the judge said.
Dredging project
Mingo and Arrindell were also found guilty of defrauding SMHGC, in cooperation with Devcon TCI Ltd. and others, of approximately $3 million between July 2012 and June 2014.
The Court followed the Prosecutor’s Office opinion that this concerns forged documents pertaining to “mobilisation cost” and “general conditions” charged to the Harbour in connection with dredging work by Devcon, while these in fact served as payments to Arrindell, who had used $370,000 of the amount to bribe MP Richardson.
In finding him guilty as charged, the Court dismissed statements by the defence pertaining to the fact that Arrindell was not a perpetrator, but a victim in this case.
The Court also dismissed the objections filed by attorney-at-law Niels van der Laan against the statements of members of Devcon management in the United States who were heard as witnesses, and allowed their testimonies as evidence in this case.
Mingo was arrested June 7, 2017. His lawyer Geert Hatzmann had said that his client should be acquitted of all charges as he had an “impeccable” track record at the Port.
The Court held it against Mingo that he had not led any discussions about the price of the contract and that the dredging project had not been put out for tender.
“Despite his denials, Mingo must have been aware of the payments to Arrindell,” the judge said. “He was the highest-ranking harbour official and Arrindell himself had stated that nothing happened in the harbour without Mingo’s knowledge.”
Furthermore, Mingo had “whitewashed” the high cost of the contract and had left the mobilisation fee unchanged, despite the fact that the amount of sand involved with the dredging project was reduced.
‘Local content’
According to Hatzmann, PSGC had fallen victim to its own success. The government – also shareholder – considered the Port as the job driver par excellence, especially for small local subcontractors and low-skilled young men with few opportunities on the regular labour market.
With this the term “local content” was born which, according to the lawyer, had nothing to do with a swindle in which fake invoices were used, but everything to do with involving local people in Port projects and hiring local contractors. Local content was a priority in harbour projects; for instance, in trucking sand and for clean-up operations, he said.
“In no way my client has acted secretly and has left the Supervisory Board ignorant of the expenditures in the context of local content,” the lawyer said during the December hearings.
The Court dismissed the concept of local content, as the existence of such a policy was not “obvious” and not supported by any written evidence.
Arrindell’s and Mingo’s lawyers immediately filed appeals after the verdicts. Hatzmann said he was “deeply disappointed” with Mingo’s conviction, which he described as a fiasco.
“I had counted on my client’s full acquittal,” Hatzmann confessed. He said he found it “remarkable” that the Court had dismissed the concept of local content, which had been the core of his defence. “Apparently the judge considered this a fantasy. My client and I remain fully committed to the position of innocence and we go on appeal combatively, because we believe in our case,” said Hatzmann.
