Guyana’s Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister, Anil Nandlall says that he, like all citizens, reserves the right to criticize rulings made by a court of law. His statement comes on the heels of Senior Magistrate, Leron Daly throwing out a challenge brought against former Finance Minister, Winston Jordan for the sale of an alleged undervalued state property to businessman, Brian Tiwari.
While acknowledging that the judiciary is independent and should be free from “intimidation” and “influence”, the Senior Counsel said that the law permits “constructive and fair” criticisms, if the situation merits such commentary.
Nandlall, during his recently aired “Issues in the News” programme, was adamant that the magistrate committed an “egregious” error when she refused to follow precedent in her determination of Jordan’s status as a public officer.
The AG argued that his colleague, Ashni Singh, who served as Finance Minister between 2011 and 2015, was deemed to be a public officer by the Chief Justice when a similar charge was brought against him for the sale of state lands on the East Coast of Demerara to the developers of Movie Towne.
“In law, there exists a doctrine known as stare decisis, which establishes that a decision made by a High Court Judge must be followed by lower Court Magistrates. Essentially, this means that the magistrate had no jurisdiction or freedom to deviate from or ignore the ruling on the same issue handed down by the Chief Justice of the country,” Nandlall argued.
This “inconsistency”, he said, is a cause for concern, since it does not bode well for fostering public trust in the judiciary.
“The current situation is alarming and should be a significant cause for concern… It is essential for the judiciary to recognize its responsibility and uphold its duty in a manner that inspires trust and confidence from the public. Neither I nor the government can fulfil this duty on behalf of the judiciary. It is solely the judiciary’s responsibility to conduct itself in a manner that not only captures but also commands respect and confidence of the public,” Nandlall noted.
The AG also highlighted the alleged disparity in treatment between cases involving political personalities and those concerning ordinary citizens. He pointed out that magistrates were going to “great lengths” to recuse themselves from such cases, often on “flimsy grounds”, leading to unnecessary adjournments and prolonging the legal process.
“If I was in doubt or if the public was in doubt about the approach of these magistrates in these cases, this ruling dissipates the doubts and sends a clear message,” Nandlall said. He emphasized that such a message is detrimental to the administration of justice and undermines public trust in the judicial system.
The Attorney General made it clear that the responsibility for taking remedial actions lies with the state and falls under the purview of the Director of Public Prosecutions and those who instituted the charges, as they represent a separate arm of the state.
The government, although not directly involved, acknowledges that this matter involves a substantial piece of state-owned real estate, further adding to the significance of the issue. The wharf, originally valued at over US$40 million, was sold for only US$100,000.
