AG charges… Bar Association misled in concluding that President ‘acted in error’
ATTORNEY-General (AG) and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall, yesterday brought to the public’s attention what he felt was an “embarrasing faux pas” on the part of the Guyana Bar Association.
The issue at hand has to do with the Association’s contention that President Donald Ramotar erred in dissolving Parliament.
FAUX PAS
In a statement, the Association said: “President Ramotar has ignored the constitutional imperative of dissolving the National Assembly, which should have been done no later than February 10th 2015… The Bar Association views the failure to dissolve the National Assembly in accordance with Article 69(1) of the constitution as a grave threat to the Rule of Law and democracy.”
However, Nandlall made it clear that the Constitution of Guyana does not at all provide for, or contemplate, the dissolving of the National Assembly.
“No Westminster-styled Constitution in the world does so,” he argued. “This must be a new and groundbreaking concept, known only to the membership of that astute Association.”
Rather, he pointed out that the Constitution of Guyana speaks of, provides for and contemplates dissolution of “Parliament” and not the “National Assembly”.
The National Assembly is made up of the 65 elected representatives of political parties, who hold seats in the House, based on the outcome of a General and Regional election. Parliament, on the other hand, comprises of the President and the National Assembly.
NOT IN ERROR
The AG said, “If such a basic but fundamental concept can elude my learned colleagues, it is not surprising that they have completely misled themselves in their contention that his Excellency acted in error.”
He added that the embarrassing aforesaid faux pas aside, the Bar Association further compounds their conundrum by its interpreting Article 69(1) to be the Article under which “the National Assembly is dissolved.”
“Even if I were to substitute the word ‘Parliament’ for ‘National Assembly’ so as to attempt to make sense of their argument, Article 69(1) only deals with how, when and where Parliament is to be summoned by the President. This summoning of Parliament can only take place after the end of a prorogation or a dissolution. The Article of the Constitution upon which the Bar Association places reliance for their contention is the wrong provision,” Nandlall said.
The Attorney General stated that Parliament remains lawfully prorogued, as it has been since the November 10 proclamation by the President.
The prorogation came in the face of a Confidence motion that would have ended the life of the 10th Parliament and move the country to even earlier elections. The Head of State’s subsequent announcement of a date for elections – May 11 – came after the objectives of prorogation – dialogue in the face of political impasse – failed.
ASSURANCE
Nandlall gave his assurance to the members of the Guyana Bar Association that the Executive will continue to “act pursuant to the letter and spirit of the Constitution of Guyana and with due adherence” to the rule of law.
“Parliament will be dissolved by His Excellency when he deems fit and in compliance with these imperatives,” he said.
Article 61 of the Constitution states that: “An election of members of the National Assembly under article 60 (2) shall be held on such day within three months after every dissolution of Parliament, as the President shall appoint by proclamation.”
PULL QUOTE:
‘If such a basic but fundamental concept can elude my learned colleagues, it is not surprising that they have completely misled themselves in their contention that his Excellency acted in error’ — AG and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall
Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Mr. Anil Nandlall