APNU doesn’t want a final ruling - AG and Speaker request CJ to rule - APNU’s position astonishing – AG

Legal representative of the Government of Guyana, Attorney General Anil Nandlall today pushed for a final ruling in the High Court case on the 2012 Budget cuts. He was supported by Attorney Khemraj Ramjattan representing the Speaker of the National Assembly Raphael Trotman.

However, the case was prolonged by legal representative for the Leader of the Opposition, Basil Williams who is seeking to prove that the cuts prevented the President of Guyana from carrying out his mandate of running the country effectively due to a reduction of funds allocated for the purpose.

Speaking to the press after today’s hearing before Chief Justice (ag) Ian Chang, AG Nandlall said the matters raised in the case are ‘pure law’ and facts are not in dispute, but are those of notoriety, and supported by the records of the National Assembly.

Attorney General Anil Nandlall in discussion with members of the Judiciary including Senior Counsel Ashton Chase (left) and Khemraj Ramjattan after today’s hearing of the 2012 Budget Cuts case.

“The narrow issue is whether the estimates presented by the Minister of Finance can be reduced by a motion moved by the Opposition,” he said.

The AG is of the view that there is no need to embark on a trial in terms of leading witnesses, and, “I have therefore asked that the affidavits which have been used in the interlocutory stage to be treated as evidence,” he said. The rules of the Court permit that to be done, he said.

He noted however, the significance of the APNU’s opposition of the Court making a final ruling. “I find that to be astonishing having regard to all the public statements they have made that they want a final ruling, that in their view the preliminary ruling is not binding. Now that we are approaching the final ruling, they are finding ways and means of delaying and even exiting the case,” the AG said. He further said that this is totally irreconcilable with the earlier positions expressed by APNU.

“Fortunately, the Speaker of the National Assembly through his lawyer, has indicated that the case is important, raises important legal issues, and it is important these legal issues be settled because they keep raising themselves in the National Assembly,” the AG added.

He expressed the hope for a ruling that would put some of the matters to rest, “and whoever is aggrieved by that ruling would then be free to file an appeal.” He is hopeful that on Wednesday, June19, the CJ would rule on how he would proceed regarding the call put forward by Attorney Williams.

Williams in his after Court comment suggested that the case be quashed and a new one brought with regard to the 2014 Budget.

Ramjattan is pushing for the final ruling and reserves the right to head to the Court of Appeal and then to the Caribbean Court of Justice if the ruling is not in his client’s favour.

Background:

The High Court case brought by the Government against the Opposition regarding the Budget cuts began on June 7, 2012 with Government’s application to the Supreme Court for an Interim Order to allow the Minister of Finance to access monies cut from the National Budget.

The argument presented in Chambers was based on the Constitutional structure of the Guyana Constitution and the doctrine of the separation of powers of the Executive, the Legislature, and the Judiciary. AG Nandlall put forward that each must have functional autonomy in the discharge of its respective functions and the wherewithal to do so. This would include the necessary finances to fulfill those functions.

The Alliance for Change and A Partnership for National Unity in their argument stated that there is no separation of powers under the Constitution. They claimed that cutting the budget was not unconstitutional. They were however, unable to demonstrate this in their arguments and also unable to point to the relevant constitutional provisions to show that they have the power to cut the budgeted estimates and expenditures for 2012 as presented by the Minister of Finance.

On July 18 in a Preliminary ruling, the Chief Justice stated that the National Assembly has no power under the constitution to reduce the National Estimates when they are presented for approval.

The ruling stated that in relation to the National Estimates, the National Assembly “performs a gate-keeping function, a power of disapproval is not contemplated by the Constitution.”

The 2012 budget was slashed by $20.9B, as a result there were no financial allocations made for several Government agencies, and the jobs of state employees were put on the line. The agencies and projects that were affected include the Government Information Agency; National Communications Network; Ethnic Relations Commission; State Planning Secretariat, Low Carbon Development Strategy; Guyana Elections Commission; Office of the President; Office of the Prime Minister; ICT development – One Laptop Per Family; Customs Anti Narcotic Unit and the Guyana Power and Light.

The 2013 Budget was also slashed by the opposition, reducing it by $31B. Among the projects that they have cut are multi-year projects such as the Amaila Falls Hydro, Cheddi Jagan International Airport Expansion and the Specialty Hospital, and state media entities NCN and GINA.