Opposition agrees to delay injunction against government
…AG gets seven days to answer Granger’s challenge of “illegal” spending
The government was yesterday given seven days to say why Chief Justice Ian Chang should not grant a Conservatory
Finance Minister Ashni Singh
Order, on behalf of Opposition Leader Brigadier (rtd) David Granger, to stay all spending or further spending by Finance Minister, Ashni Singh, or any other Government Ministers on programmes disapproved by the National Assembly. Granger’s lawyers filed a legal challenge in the High Court last Thursday via affidavit to halt all unapproved spending by the Administration until the current matter has been determined. When the matter was called yesterday morning, A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) representatives, agreed to give the government a chance to respond as to why the stay should not be issued. The opposition lawyers were seeking an ex-parte injunction. However, it was agreed upon by both sides that the government should be given a chance to respond. Attorney General, Anil Nandlall, who is representing the government, will have to file an affidavit in answer, while Basil Williams, one of the lawyers for the plaintiff, will file a further affidavit in reply, if needed. The two parties will return to court on December 29. Both sides declined to finalise a date for hearing. Instead, both sides decided that the December 29 date would be for report. APNU said that its address to the court is in a bid to stop the “unauthorized spending of billions of dollars, monies that were disapproved in the National Budget earlier this year.” The court application named Minister of Finance, Dr. Ashni Singh, the Attorney General and Speaker of the National Assembly, Raphael Trotman as the defendants. Outside of the Order to stay, claims were made for the court to declare that the National Assembly, in keeping with Article 218 (2) of the Constitution, lawfully disapproved in the annual estimates of Revenue and Expenditure of 2014 and was reflected in the Appropriation Bill Number 6 of 2014 and confirmed by the Appropriation Act Number 10 of 2014. The Opposition-controlled National Assembly disapproved some $36.75B. The money included $1.3B from Office of the
Opposition Leader Brigadier (rtd) David Granger
President (OP) under its Administrative Services programme; $3.8B also from OP for capital estimates also under Administrative Services; some $22B from Ministry of Finance; $1.1B from Ministry of Amerindian Affairs’ Development Fund; $6.78B from Ministry of Public Works capital work and $1.3B from the Ministry of Health’s Regional and Clinical. APNU wants the court to declare that Government unlawfully spent or authorized the spending of monies despite its disapprovals. Minister Singh had admitted that some $4.5B had been spent for the period ended June 16, 2014, “in breach of Articles 217 and 219 (2) of the Constitution and the decisions of the National Assembly to disapprove these Programmes,” court documents highlighted. Among several other things, APNU wants the court to order also that the spending was “unconstitutional, ultra vires, null and void, unreasonable and in breach of the doctrine of the separation of powers”. APNU’s arguments were prepared by Senior Counsel Rex McKay and Attorneys-at-Law Basil Williams, Hewley Griffith, Lawrence Harris, Michael Somersall, Joseph Harmon, James Bond, LLewellyn John and Bettina Glasford. Some of the disapproval sums affected agencies such as the Government Information Agency (GINA) and the National Communications Network (NCN) and projects including the Specialty Hospital, the Cheddi Jagan International Airport Expansion Project and the Amaila Falls Hydro Project. Government had gone to court last year and based on a ruling by the Chief Justice had interpreted it to mean that Parliament could not cut or disapprove the National Budget. The Opposition has objected this notion saying that the architects of the Constitution catered for cutting when it was written that the National Budget has to come before the floors of the House.