Development and Opportunity Minister Terry Lister improperly interfered with a racial discrimination complaint before the Human Rights Commission, causing it to be unfairly dismissed, according to the former executive officer of the Commission, Neville Darrell.

Mr. Darrell recounted his version of events in an affidavit filed in the Supreme Court last week, providing the first direct account of the disputed case by an officer of the Commission at the time.

Mr. Darrell said that the Minister's behaviour forced him to leave his position at the Human Rights Commission.

The handling of the complaint, brought by businessman Harold Darrell against officers of the Bank of Bermuda, was in dispute almost as soon as it was lodged in October last year -- with the businessman accusing the Commission of attempting to delay the case to the bank's benefit.

Mr. Darrell, owner of The Hardell Group, a media company, was eventually told by the Commission that the case had been dismissed because it was found to be without merit -- contradicting an earlier position that the complaint was valid and should be heard by the Board of Inquiry.

But the businessman obtained a Supreme Court order earlier this month binding the Commission to reopen the case.

The Royal Gazette understands that the parties have been unable to agree on where to restart the proceedings -- from the very beginning or at the Board of Inquiry stage.

And Harold Darrell is going back to Supreme Court, with Neville Darrell's affidavit in tow, seeking clarification.

"We don't mind if the current Minister accepts the situation and sends it to a Board of Inquiry or an acting Minister makes that decision,'' said Mr.

Darrell's lawyer, Michael Smith.

When asked, he said he could not explain why the case had not already restarted at the Board of Inquiry stage.

"It has to be interference of some sort,'' said Mr. Smith. "So on we plug.'' The lawyer added that he had every confidence in the judicial system and praised Neville Darrell for providing his information to the Attorney General's chambers early on in the process.

"We asked him if he would give us the same information and he did,'' said Mr.

Smith.

"He's an extremely conscientious person and he was put in a very difficult position by this Minister. I think it says a lot for him as a person... The fact that he speaks out about this speaks volumes for him.'' Wilhelm Bourne, a lawyer at the Attorney General's Chambers, who has been representing the Commission, declined to comment.

A "shocked'' Alan Marshall, Mr. Lister's Parliamentary shadow, repeated a previous call for an inquiry into the matter.

"In today's day and age, politicians ought to be over and above such behaviour,'' said Mr. Marshall.

"I am absolutely appalled by the actions and behaviour of the Minister.

"There better be a plausible explanation for this. I am appalled and the country ought to be appalled. I'm shocked.'' But he said it was too early to call for Mr. Lister's resignation because the matter was still being looked at by the courts.

"The issue here is really smoking out the truth of all this -- the Minister must explain himself.'' He added : "I think the public should be able to judge for themselves whether it calls for the minister to resign.'' Mr. Marshall said Neville Darrell had spent most of his professional life in the human rights field locally and in Canada.

"From an integrity point of view this man comes through with flying colours.

Obviously something has happened to make his position extremely uncomfortable.

That should be cause for concern.'' The former Executive Officer of the Human Rights Commission says in his affidavit that the minister put him in an untenable position by insisting that the Commission dismiss the complaint even though it had already determined that the complaint was legitimate and should be heard by a Board of Inquiry.

He added that the Minister himself was being discriminatory by his actions.

"I am clear that the only basis for the Minister not proceeding forward with the appointment of a Board of Inquiry was on the basis of the complainant...

himself,'' writes Neville Darrell.

"That this act of discrimination on the part of the minister placed me in a toxic, poisoned work environment with the minister...'' Mr. Darrell goes on to say that the Minister's direction was against the public interest and "thereafter my tenure at the Human Rights Commission was over, either by my cooperation... or by my own conscience and my espoused commitment to Human Rights in my community and my need to step aside.'' Mr. Darrell's version of events supports Harold Darrell's contention that the minister wrongly interfered in the Commission's work.

He said soon after he had delivered a letter signed by Dr. Goodwin Smith asking the minister to appoint a Board of Inquiry to hear the case he was summoned to a meeting at the Minister's office with the Director of Human Affairs Kenneth Dill present.

At that meeting the minister "stated to me that there would be times during my tenure... that I would have to tear down the temple and that on other occasions I would simply do nothing.'' Mr. Dill, he continued, said nothing to support the complaint going forward to the Board of Inquiry stage, but later attempted to see to it that the minister's direction was obeyed.

A month after the meeting with the minister, according to Mr. Darrell, he met with Commission chairman Dr. Goodwin Smith and the final decision to dismiss the complaint was made, according to the Minister's instructions.

"The dismissal of Mr. Darrell's complaint has caused me a great deal of distress, shame and embarrassment,'' wrote Mr. Darrell.

"I decided to take responsibility for Mr. Darrell's complaint because it was seen as the best strategy to both, seek to restore my faith and trust in the Commission as a result of the negative publicity against it, and also to provide me with an opportunity not to work with the Minister any further because I believe he acted against the equity interest of a citizen, and against the spirit of the Human Rights Act which I am committed to uphold.'' The affidavit continues : "I believe it is better to be perceived as incompetent and not remain at the Commission than to be labelled as lacking in integrity and fairness in my treatment of people in my community.'' Mr. Lister has consistently refused to comment on the matter.

Terry Lister