Dear Editor:
The Chief Justice (ag.) has recently ruled on the Compton Reid’s petition, disqualifying individuals with dual citizenship from being eligible to be members of the National Assembly of Guyana. She has ruled that by virtue of Article 155(1) of the Constitution such individuals holding seats in Parliament must vacate their seats.
However, the more egregious breach of the Constitution is the appointment of Cabinet Ministers who are ineligible. Article 183 (1) of the Constitution of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana Act states: “The office of a Minister who was not an elected member of the Assembly at the time of his or her appointment and has not subsequently become such a member shall become vacant if the holder of the office – (a) cease to be a citizen of Guyana; or (b) he or she becomes disqualified for election as a member of the Assembly by virtue of Article 155 or any law enacted pursuance thereof”.
It has been widely reported that the following Ministers – Joseph Harmon, Carl Greenidge, Rupert Roopnarine and Domenic Gaskin – have dual citizenships or foreign allegiance or obedience to foreign powers or states. This makes them ineligible to hold office as Members of Parliament and since they were appointed as Ministers by virtue of being Members of Parliament, they are holding office in direct contravention of Article 155 (1) and Article 183 (1) of the Constitution.
It is incumbent upon these individuals and others in similar circumstances to immediately vacate their positions since they are holding their portfolios illegally. It is also important that they understand that there is no curative relief, by way of relinquishing their foreign citizenship and allegiance, for their illegality subsequent to the pronouncement of the Court. These Ministers are illegal by operation of law and fact. It is worth noting that they ought to demit office immediately and Appeal of the Chief Justice’s (ag.) decision does not save their invalid Ministerial positions.
The seriousness of this breach of the Constitution has far-reaching consequences. These Ministers are void of legal authority and therefore all their directives are illegal. They are not allowed to exercise any Ministerial duties, responsibilities or privileges. They must understand that any expenditure emanating from the purview of their office is without legal basis and they will be held personally liable. They will not be afforded Ministerial immunity as they are acting outside of the ambit of lawful authority. Their authority and actions in so far as they are in breach of the Constitution are of no force or effect.
Their actions will have dire repercussions for any contracts, agreements, promotions and other arrangements involving other parties directly or indirectly. The President and Government of Guyana will have to account for this on-going illegality as they are fully aware of the Court’s decision and the requirement of the Constitution. Their pronouncements and actions after the Court’s ruling clearly demonstrate their wanton disregard for the law and the Judiciary. A significant proportion of the Executive is illegal and by extension the Government of Guyana is illegal. The President has made these illegal appointments to the Cabinet and he must take personal responsibility to immediately rescind these appointments.
The status quo cannot be demonstrably justified in any free and democratic society. The Rule of Law is at its brink. It is imperative that a citizen of Guyana obtain standing to bring an action for Judicial Review of the validity of these Ministers’ portfolios.
The Speaker of the National Assembly and Parliament and the Judiciary should follow the law and ensure that these individuals are not accorded the status of Ministers and MPs. Doing otherwise would be recklessly breaching the letter and spirit of the Constitution.
Tamesh N Lilmohan, Toronto |
Dear Editor:
It is very unfortunate that heads of government ignore Court Orders as this sets the tone for a breakdown of law and order.
David Granger as head of state and government by ignoring the no confidence motion and the Order by Chief Justice (ag) Roxane George giving validity to the December 21 parliamentary 33-32 motion is blatant. His excuse that the decision is being appealed is unacceptable since he was advised that an appeal does not act as a stay. Moreso in this case the Chief Justice denied a request made by the Attorney General for a stay. The Bar Council of the Bar Association has issued a statement stating that the clock is ticking and that the country is entering into a constitutional crisis.
It is clear to my mind that the government wants to stall the election as long as possible because it is likely that appeals from the Guyana Court of Appeal and the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) will not be concluded before the March 21 deadline. House-to-house registration to ensure that there is a clean list is merely an excuse since only a few months ago there were local government elections.
Disrespect of Court Orders is not new in Guyana. In December 1997 the late Janet Jagan tossed away an Order Nisi made by the then Chief Justice Desiree Bernard prohibiting the then Chancellor Cecil Kennard from swearing her (Jagan) as President. Mrs Jagan had already been sworn in privately. Mrs. Jagan’s action was severely criticized at the time since legal experts say that Justice Bernard’s ruling was still binding even it was made after the fact. In September 2013 I interviewed the former Chancellor as she was about to demit office as a judge of the CCJ, and asked her about the “tossing of the Court Order” incident which was considered as contemptuous and disrespectful and injured the image and authority of the judiciary. However, the former Chancellor who is highly respected in the Caribbean, having held many firsts said she held the view that Mrs. Jagan was not disrespectful to her or the Court for that “unfortunate action” and that they had a good relationship until her demise.
Maybe I should turn to another aspect of the judiciary when under the Burnham regime, the PNC flag was flown at the Court of Appeal which at the time was the highest court in the country since appeals to the UK Privy Council were abolished and the CCJ was not yet inaugurated. Guyana at that time was under a socialist regime and the government was an arm of the PNC party.
However two decades later a former Chancellor (ag) Carl Singh, told a University of Guyana-sponsored lecture that with the passage of time, the Judiciary has reasserted its independence and its neutrality and that the rule of law is maintained. Singh retired as acting Chancellor and could not be confirmed because the then leader of the Opposition did not agree as required under the amended Constitution which now calls for “agreement” rather than “consultation”. In fact since Justice Bernard demitted office as Chancellor in April 2005 to join the CCJ there was no “confirmed” Chancellor. A very unfortunate situation.
Oscar Ramjeet via email
|