Dear Editor,

AS A senior Guyanese citizen, who is interested in seeing that the people of Guyana unite and work together in helping to cause Guyana to progress, I cannot help but make my observation known to the public in relation to the recent issue raised by my former Attorney General, Anil Nandlall.Firstly, I wish to clearly state that no one is perfect; we all make mistakes. The PPP/C did when they were in power, and the AFC/APNU will make mistakes from time to time. There is nothing wrong if any member of the public draws attention to any mistake;
however, when persons deliberately try to misguide the public with observations that are full of half-truths, so as to have the public on their side, it is time to speak up.

The incident I am speaking about is the case that was decided against the Government in November, 2015. This case was started while the PPP/C was in power, and Mr. Nandlall has publicly acknowledged that he assigned it to a private practitioner to handle. He is now criticising current Attorney General Basil Williams for being incompetent because Mr. Williams is saying he was not aware of the case, and that a decision was given against the Government.

To properly understand my concern, it is essential for me to give you a short background of my legal experience. I have been practising in Guyana as an attorney-at-law since 1972; firstly, as a prosecutor with the Office of the Director of Public Prosecution, then as a special legal adviser to the Ministry of Natural Resources, where I created Guy Oil with the assistance of Carl Hooper Snr. and Mr. Leon Rockliffe, who was responsible for establishing Guy Oil. I then came into private practice, and in 1983 I won a murder case in Barbados at a time when the Learned Chancellor of the Judiciary, the Attorney General Basil Williams, and Neil Boston were final year LLB students in Barbados. I had the opportunity to give them encouragement to become good lawyers, and I think my advice prevailed. Now one can understand that I am speaking from a background of experience.

If a private practitioner is appointed to act as the legal representative of the Government of Guyana, that practitioner has a responsibility to keep his clients informed of the status of the case. At this point, I would expect that after the case was finished in the High Court, the practitioner had a professional duty to notify the then current Attorney General of the decision that was given. This current Attorney General states he was not informed.

The second point is that based on the impression he has given, the former Attorney General would have known of the decision. If he was genuine, he would have personally notified the current Attorney General, but this seems not to have been done.

Further, my understanding is that when an office holder is leaving office, he is duty bound to hand down to, and inform, the new official of all the current matters that are at hand. One wonders if this was ever done. Had this been done, it would be obvious that the new Attorney General would have been duly informed of all the unfinished matters.

I now ask the question to which I would ask Mr. Anil Nandlall to respond, so that the public could become aware of the circumstances. Until this is done, I would say that Mr. Anil Nandlall has no right to publicly make statements about the current Attorney General and cast blame on him. Speak now, Mr. Nandlall, and let us know who the liar is; and then let us go to the Parliamentary Committee as you are suggesting in the case of Dr. Norton.

Regards,
JONAS CODDETT