Opposition rendered speechless (Big, Big head), after losing ‘Lotto Fund’ crusade --owes nation an apology for misleading it |
Written by |
Sunday, 13 January 2013 01:51 |
THE political opposition has gone completely mum on its decade-old argument that the ruling People’s Progress Party/ Civic is in breach of the Constitution of Guyana when it established a Development Fund to be used as a repository for the proceeds from the sale of lottery tickets. Neither the new A Partnership for National Unity (APNU), the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) or the Alliance for Change (AFC) have had the gumption to challenge the ruling of Justice Diane Insanally after her dismissal last week of legal proceedings filed by APNU Member of Parliament, Mr. Desmond Trotman.The lawsuit at reference had challenged the constitutionality and legality of the government’s deposit of the proceeds from the National Lottery into the Fund, popularly referred to as the ‘Lotto Fund’. What is even more baffling is the deafening silence on the matter, in that all parties involved have not sought, with the same fervour they had advocated and publicised this alleged misdemeanour, to admit that their collective position was purely political, conjectural, and aimed at trumping up their political and corrupt rhetoric. According to some political analysts, “It is high time the combined opposition demonstrate political maturity and apologise to the thousands of Guyanese, or better still offer an admission that they were wrong to have misread the Constitution of Guyana.” They also feel that Trotman, whom they see as the proverbial sacrificial lamb, must also go public and explain whether he is satisfied with the Court’s ruling on the matter, or whether he intends to appeal the decision, which has been both widely publicised and accepted by several legal luminaries. “Where are the Greenidges, Rams and Goolsarans?” is the one refrain among some politicos, who feel the matter should not be allowed to ‘go cold’, now that the Courts of Guyana have expressed a judicial position, which vindicates the Administration’s arguments all along, going as far back as 1999. Attorney-General Anil Nandlall is of the opinion that, much as he admires their bravura, the opposition made a major political blunder when they decided to put their “propaganda and misinformation” machinery to the test in court. He is even quoted as saying, “The Government....encourages the Opposition to take more of these issues with which they have difficulties to the Court for resolution rather than using them in the Press and elsewhere to perpetuate their self-induced perception of lack of transparency and accountability in government’s business and to lend sustenance to their omnipresent zombie of corruption in all spheres of governmental activities.” He has held firm that the Administration’s move to establish the Fund was both legal and in line with all the transparency regulations outlined in the Constitution, a fact that Justice Insanally was able to substantiate, having found that the deposit of the monies in the Development Fund of Guyana (Lotto Fund) is in accordance with Article 216 of the Constitution, the provisions of the Fiscal Management, as well as the Accountability Act and the Lotteries Act, thereby exonerating the government of any wrongdoing. In light of this development, the Administration is hoping that the matter would be laid to rest, so it could get on with the business of running the country. The Opposition, using its one-seat majority, has also misled the House into thinking it could force the Finance Minister to commit the Lotto proceeds to the Consolidated Fund. Even former Attorney-General, Mr Charles Ramson, had said there was nothing wrong with government seeking to establish the Fund, and at one point had occasion to caution the then Auditor-General, Annan Goolsarran that his challenge to the legitimacy of the Fund was ill-advised and without merit. As one analyst observed: “Where is the spirit of compromise? And where is the opposition’s conscience now? Guyana awaits an apology.”
|
Last Updated on Sunday, 13 January 2013 01:54 |