Star Sabga: the third Hadeed-case detainee still behind bars as her call leaks

Alexander's defence of Sabga's continued detention rests on a 19-page affidavit dated July 24, 2026, submitted to the High Court, which discloses alleged intercepted communications and outlines security agencies' reasoning.

• According to Guardian Media's reporting on the affidavit, Alexander alleged that intercepted communications from Sabga's landline and Genevieve Hadeed's mobile device contained phrases including 'somebody getting ah bullet in dey head' and 'the only way this thing going to end is when ah bullet fly,' which security agencies assessed as potentially relevant to an investigation into an alleged wider plot to harm or assassinate Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar and members of her Government.
• Alexander disclosed that the Hadeeds' electronic devices were 'exploited by partner agencies in the United States,' and alleged that investigators established a pattern of communication between Genevieve Hadeed and individuals being monitored by international agencies in connection with cross-border crime.
• The July 19 Review Tribunal found 'insufficient cause for the detainee's detention' and concluded Sabga's continued detention was not necessary or expedient in the public interest; Alexander accepted the Tribunal's recommendation for Dominic and Genevieve Hadeed — who were released without charge — but rejected it for Sabga, citing procedural unfairness, withheld intelligence and incomplete risk assessment.
• Alexander stated security agencies expected a 'neutralisation' exercise — described as checks on individuals associated with Sabga both within and outside her community — to take another two weeks to complete, and warned her release before then could place senior Government officials at risk.
• Justice Vigel Paul has scheduled a 2 pm Monday hearing to consider Sabga's application for interim release, after granting the State the weekend to respond to lengthy affidavits; the State is represented in part by British King's Counsel Sir James Eadie.
• A widely circulated audio clip, claimed to be an intelligence intercept of the Sabga-Hadeed conversation, has not been independently verified by Guardian Media, and neither Sabga nor Hadeed has publicly confirmed the voices as theirs; Assistant Commissioner of Police Richard Smith has stated the leak will be investigated in collaboration with the existing inquiry.

Sabga's ongoing detention without charge is now the focal point of what legal observers describe as a significant test of the limits of executive emergency powers in Trinidad and Tobago. With the High Court set to rule on interim release and a substantive constitutional challenge still pending, the outcome will determine whether preventive detention orders can be maintained against an individual after a statutory Tribunal has recommended release — a question with implications for every citizen whose communications may be subject to interception under the State of Emergency.

The Privy Council's indication that it cannot hear the State's appeal on the Hadeeds' matter before its annual recess — with October dates now recommended — means the broader constitutional questions underpinning all three PDOs will remain unresolved for months. Meanwhile, the police investigation into who leaked the purported intercept adds a separate accountability dimension involving the Strategic Services Agency and its oversight framework.

What to watch: • Monday 2 pm High Court hearing before Justice Vigel Paul on Sabga's application for interim release — and whether the court extends or rejects her detention pending the substantive constitutional challenge. • October Privy Council sitting on the State's appeal arising from the Hadeeds' Court of Appeal proceedings — which will address the constitutional limits of preventive detention under the State of Emergency. • TTPS investigation into the source of the leaked audio recording — including whether it originated from the Strategic Services Agency and whether any public official or intelligence officer will face disciplinary or criminal proceedings.

"Sabga has been held at Golden Grove Women's Prison since June 25, 2026 — more than a month — without being charged with any criminal offence, despite a statutory Review Tribunal concluding on July 19 that there was insufficient cause for her detention."

— Guardian Media / Trinidad and Tobago Guardian, corroborated across multiple outlets

Trinidad and Tobago's State of Emergency — declared by the Persad-Bissessar administration amid a surge in gang-related violence — granted the executive sweeping preventive detention powers that, until recently, most citizens assumed would target armed criminals, not businesspeople. The Sabga case has shattered that assumption.

Preventive detention regimes across the Commonwealth Caribbean have historically faced challenge at the Privy Council level, but rarely has a case combined so many combustible elements at once: a septuagenarian detainee, an overruled statutory tribunal, a transnational intelligence dimension involving U.S. partner agencies, and a purportedly leaked intercept that went viral on social media before any court had ruled on its admissibility or legality. The Interception of Communications Act, which governs lawful wiretapping in Trinidad and Tobago, requires judicial authorisation — and Opposition voices are now publicly questioning whether that threshold was met before Sabga's landline was tapped. Political strategist Pearce Robinson, having analysed the circulating audio, concluded it captured 'an elderly woman venting privately,' not evidence of a coordinated assassination plot — a characterisation Alexander's affidavit directly contests.

Viewpoint: Alexander argues that the intercepted statements reflect knowledge of a pre-existing plan to harm Government officials, that the Tribunal process was procedurally unfair to the State, and that releasing Sabga before security agencies complete their risk assessment and 'neutralisation' exercise would constitute a serious dereliction of his constitutional duty.

Viewpoint: PNM Senator Foster Cummings warned that 'even our senior citizens are now being subjected to this heavy-handed abuse of executive power,' calling the leak 'an unforgivable invasion of privacy and total betrayal of public trust.' Sabga's counsel Rishi Dass, SC, characterised the detention as 'significant and egregious Executive overreach.' Attorney Fareed Ali demanded the State confirm whether the circulating audio is the same recording relied upon when issuing the PDOs — arguing the public cannot assess proportionality until that is established.

Viewpoint: Griffith's primary concern is not the recording's content but the apparent breach of SSA security protocols, arguing that intelligence agencies must never become instruments of political propaganda and that those responsible for any leak should face independent disciplinary and criminal investigation.