JUSTICE Diane Insanally has dismissed legal proceedings brought against the government challenging the constitutionality and legality of its deposit of the proceeds from the lottery into a Developmental Fund, popularly referred to as the “Lotto Fund”. The lawsuit, filed by APNU Member of Parliament, Mr. Desmond Trotman, was dismissed on December 28, 2012, on the ground that it was ‘misconceived’. Besides dismissing the matter, the Judge struck it out, and ordered the Applicant, Trotman, to pay to the Respondent, the Attorney-General, $50,000 in costs.  Trotman was represented by Mr. Miles Fitzpatrick, S.C. and Mr. Christopher Ram.   For several years now, opposition politicians and detractors of the Government, including Ram, a Chartered Accountant, and Mr. Anand Goolsarran, a former Auditor-General, have severely criticised the depositing of money into the “Lotto Funds” as opposed to lodging it  into the Consolidated Fund.  The government’s contention has always been that it is perfectly lawful and proper and constitutional to place those monies in a fund separate and apart from the Consolidated Fund. APNU’s Mr. Carl Greenidge had moved a Motion in the House last year, seeking to compel the Minister of Finance to deposit these monies directly into the Consolidated Fund, contending that it was unlawful and unconstitutional to deposit it elsewhere. In debating this Motion in the National Assembly, the Government had argued that the Motion was misconceived, and that the provisions of the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act, Article 216 of the Constitution and the Lotteries Act permit those monies to be keep outside of the Consolidated Fund and in a Development Fund. Using their one-seat majority, however, the Opposition passed their Motion.  These were the identical issues raised by Trotman in the legal proceedings.  He posed to the Court for determination, the following issues:- (1)   Whether Article 216 of the Constitution and sections 21 and 38 of the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act 2003 require all monies paid to the Government of Guyana by the Guyana Lottery Company Limited under an agreement made between the said Government and Canadian Bank Note Limited and/or the Guyana Lottery Company for the conduct of a lottery in Guyana to be paid into the Consolidated Fund. (2)   Whether the monies received by the Government of Guyana from the Guyana Lottery Company Limited ought to have been paid in the past and ought to be paid in the future into the Consolidated Fund. (3)   A declaration that the failure of the Government to pay into the Consolidated Fund all the monies received from the Guyana Lottery Company Limited (GLC) under the said agreement is unconstitutional and illegal. (4)   A declaration that the expenditure by the Government of Guyana of monies received from the Guyana Lottery Limited without the authority of Parliament is unconstitutional and illegal. The Court, in dismissing the matter, found that the deposit of the monies into the Development Fund of Guyana (Lotto Fund) is in accordance with Article 216 of the Constitution, the provisions of the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act and the Lotteries Act, thereby vindicating the Government’s position.  The