A long running dispute between local cable company The Hardell Group and the Bank of Bermuda is heading for resolution by a Board of Inquiry - a decision Opposition Senator Neville Darrell calls a victory for the rule of law.

And Sen. Darrell, a former executive officer of the Human Rights Commission, is considering legal action against Government.

Meanwhile the Bank of Bermuda is questioning why the decision was made since the Supreme Court has not yet completed a judicial review on whether the dispute - which concerns a complaint brought against the Bank by Hardell - should go to a Board of Inquiry.

Former Human Affairs Minister Terry Lister found himself at the centre of controversy last year when Hardell alleged that he had interfered in a racial discrimination complaint against the Bank of Bermuda filed with the Human Rights Commission, causing it to be unfairly dismissed.

Hardell, owned by businessman Harold Darrell, took its case to Supreme Court which ruled that the Human Rights Commission reopen the case but the parties were unable to agree on whether the case should be reopened from the start or at the Board of Inquiry stage and Hardell took the matter back to the courts for a decision.

The Human Rights Commission at the time felt that the process should start at the very beginning while The Hardell Group insisted that the complaint should go to the Board of Inquiry as originally recommended by the Commission.

Hardell's lawyer at the time, Michael Smith, said the Commission's insistence on starting over was yet another sign of political interference in the matter.

Community and Sport Minister Randy Horton now has responsibility for the Human Rights Commission.

The decision to set up a Board of Inquiry to hear the complaint was communicated to the parties by Human Affairs director Kenneth Dill last week, The Royal Gazette understands.

Yesterday efforts to contact Minister Horton and Mr. Dill were unsuccessful.

Hardell's complaint will now be heard publicly by the Board of Inquiry on a date yet to be determined.

The dispute led to the end of Neville Darrell's tenure as executive director of the Human Rights Commission after just six months on the job.

Mr. Darrell, now an Opposition Senator, filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court last May, describing Minister Lister's actions as discrimination which “placed me in a toxic, poisoned work environment with the Minister”.

He accused the Minister of violating the spirit of the Human Rights Act and “acting against the equity interest of a citizen”.

Bank of Bermuda released this statement in response to a request for comment: “As there is currently a stay on all proceedings of the Human Rights Commission with regard to this matter, we were surprised to receive a letter from them advising us of the Board of Inquiry. The stay was issued by the Supreme Court as part of the judicial review commenced by Mr. Darrell seeking to have the dismissal of his complaint by the Human Rights Commission reconsidered. We are currently awaiting clarification from the Human Rights Commission and so are unable to comment further on this development.”

Sen. Darrell was a little more upbeat when asked for his reaction to the news.

He said he was “thrilled” when the news came and described the Human Rights Commission decision as a vindication but a “bittersweet” victory.

“It is somewhat bittersweet to the extent that a citizen of this Country who was duly entitled to fair and equitable treatment had to persist for just a little over two years, using his own resources - financially and emotionally - to bring about a resolution to a matter which has always been his right to have.”

Asked if he was considering legal action himself, he said: “Certainly, there is an option for myself with regard to this matter. Essentially what the Commission has done is to vindicate the action I, on behalf of the Commission, took way back when. Certainly, it was a decision that was unpopular, but I think doing the fair thing should never be balanced on the scale of whether it is popular. You must do it because it's right.”

He added: “The Human Rights legislation doesn't create a pecking order, or a gradient of citizens with regard to fair and equitable treatment. It says we are all part of the human family. And so yes I'm going to consider that (legal action)...”

He said that the affair had taken a major toll on his personal and professional life. “It came at such great cost to myself, my family and my career - what was fair and right and proper should have been so frustrated for so long.

“Having said that I always believed that the system would eventually do the right thing. And it cost me a great deal to believe that but I really believe that the rule of law is the way that we need to move ahead in protecting the rights of citizens within this Country. After all it was the true spirit of the rule of law in the first instance that gave us the human rights history that we now celebrate.”