Confirm Chancellor and Chief Justice – Article 13
Apr 20, 2022 --- Source --- Kaieteur News Online --- https://www.kaieteurnewsonline...-justice-article-13/
Kaieteur News – After decades of no confirmed Chief Justice and Chancellor of the Judiciary, Article 13, a civil society body, has called on the Government of Guyana and Opposition to finally appoint those who have been acting in the respective capacities.
Acting Chief Justice, Roxane George-Wiltshire
In a statement to the media on Monday, the group, including Attorney-at-Law, Christopher Ram and transparency advocate, Yog Mahadeo, pointed out that the former acting Chancellor of the Judiciary and Justice of the Court of Appeal, Carl Singh, retired in 2017 after serving 12 years. Justice Yonnette Cummings-Edwards has been acting since then.
Similarly, Justice Ian Chung served as acting Chief Justice, from 2010 to 2016 and was never confirmed. Following his retirement, Justice Roxane George-Wiltshire was appointed to serve as acting Chief Justice.
In this regard, Article 13 said, “We consider it manifestly unfair not to confirm the incumbents who have acted in their positions for several years. If the President is not so inclined, he must say so and offer reasons. Once the President begins the process, the onus shifts to the LOP (Leader of the Opposition) to respond.”
According to the Constitution, there must be an agreement between the President and Leader of the Opposition on the appointments.
Under the 1966 Independence Constitution, it was the Governor General who had the power to appoint the Chancellor and the Chief Justice “on the recommendation of the Prime Minister after consultation with the Leader of the Opposition.” However, the 1980 Constitution abolished the office of Governor General and transferred its appointing powers to the Executive President, after consultation with the minority leader, the group explained.
In addition, there was a later amendment, which was made as part of the Constitutional Reform process under the Herdmanston Accord that required an “agreement” between the President and the Leader of the Opposition.
Since Article 127 A of the Constitution vests in the President the power and the duty to appoint a Chancellor and a Chief Justice, after obtaining the agreement of the Leader of the Opposition, the civil society body argued that if the amendment was intended to advance the process, it has had the opposite effect with no appointment since the change.
Acting Chancellor of the Judiciary, Justice Yonnette Cummings-Edwards
According to Article 13 it, “notes with dismay that successive Administrations, Presidents and Leaders of the Opposition have been unable to agree on these appointments, unmindful and unresponsive to calls to address this egregious state of affairs. In our view, this failure shows a disregard for the Constitution and the rule of law and puts the judicial system of the country in a negative light. To blame the system or to call for its change is like advocating changing the system of free and fair elections because one political party does not want to play by the rules of democracy!”
The group went on to say that the President as well as the Opposition Leader both took an Oath to uphold the Constitution in its entirety, not partially. To this end, they said that President Irfaan Ali must initiate the appointment or confirmation process, then the onus shifts to the Leader of the Opposition to respond.
“The reforms necessary can then follow these appointments. Such reforms are not only necessary because of the political games which are a standard fare in our political culture but importantly, because of the imperative to remove the association of the appointments of the top judicial officers from the political arena. Our success as a country will depend on good governance, adherence to the rule of law and the strengthening of our political culture,” the civil society body reasoned.
Furthermore, they said that it will also require addressing equally pressing matters such as the “woefully inadequate” number of judges in the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
Article 13 was keen to note that this demands attention as the recent batch of judges appointed under the Coalition have performed commendably and fears that the pool is empty, may not be accurate.
According to the body, “Regrettably, it is going to be much easier to draw from the AG’s Chambers, the Office of the DPP, the magistracy and attorneys in the public sector to make up the complement of judges our country so badly needs, than it is to ask private practitioners to give up their lucrative practice, even temporarily. With proper training, individuals chosen from the groups mentioned will rise to the occasion.”