A RECENT High Court ruling, in which a Presidential respite which was granted to Minister of Finance, Winston Jordan, was thrown by Justice Nareshwar Harnanan, has been taken to the Court of Appeal.

The appeal was filed on March 18, 2020 by the Attorney General, Basil Williams.
On March 10, 2020, Justice Harnanan, quashed the Presidential respite granted to Jordan by President Granger, who invoked his power under Article 188(1) (b) of the Constitution,  in a bid to spare the minister from being sent to prison for 21 days.

The granting of the respite by the President is tied to a court matter involving Trinidadian firm, DIPCON Engineering, which dates back to 2015.
Justice Rishi Persaud handed down the judgement in the matter on October 21, 2015 in favour of DIPCON.

DIPCON’s lawyer, Timothy Jonas, subsequently filed contempt proceedings on the matter in May 2019 regarding the sum owed to the firm.

Last June, Justice Priya Sewnarine-Beharry held Jordan in criminal contempt for failing to pay over the sum of US$2,228,400 in damages for breach of contract, together with interest which had been awarded to DIPCON.
Justice Sewnarine-Beharry, in handing down judgment on the matter, gave Minister Jordan up to July 8, 2019 to pay over the sum to DIPCON.

However, the President exercised his power under Article 188(1)(b) of the Constitution to grant Jordan, both in his personal capacity and in his capacity as minister, “respite of the execution of the punishment until all appeals and remedies available to him and the State have been exhausted.”

On March 18, 2020, the Attorney General filed an appeal to the ruling made by Justice Harnanan on several grounds, one being that the judge erred in law by finding that the decision of President David Granger to grant a respite after the refusal of the stay of Execution by the Court, undermined the administration of justice and the rule of law and also it breached the separations of powers doctrine.

In addition, the Attorney General contends that the trial judge “erred in law by finding that the decision of the President of Guyana to grant a respite was an interference with the functioning of Parliament which had laid before it a Supplementary appropriations Bill to issue from the Consolidated Fund, as there was no nexus between the issuance of the respite and the Supplementary Appropriation Bill.”

The Attorney General also contends that the trial judge erred by “breaching the principles of the Separation of Powers in entering the province of the executive, especially in relation to the use of prerogative powers exercised by the Executive Arm of the state.”
As regards the monies owed to DIPCON, the Minister of Finance, earlier this month, paid the Trinidad engineering and construction company the sum owed for work undertaken under the Peoples Progressive Party Civic administration.
Recently, the Full Court of the High Court threw out an appeal made by Minister Jordan on

the contempt charges on the grounds that he refused to carry out his obligation to pay. Judgement was handed down by Justice Diana Insanally and Simone Morris-Ramlall.
The Attorney General is expected to file an appeal on that matter at the Court of Appeal next week.