ATTORNEY GENERAL and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall last evening expressed ‘profound regret’ at a press release issued by Speaker of the National Assembly, Raphael Trotman, concerning the government’s resort to the Judiciary on the matter of cuts to the National Budget 2012 by the parliamentary opposition. In a statement, the Attorney General said the pillars on which our legal system rests ensures that all are equal in the eyes of the law, and this applies to the ordinary citizen, the Executive Government and the National Assembly.
In his press release, Speaker Raphael Trotman said the government’s resort to the High Court points “to the grave and gathering danger of a constitutional crisis which has the potential to assume proportions, the likes of which the nation has never seen, and may be unable to handle.”

Following is the text of the Attorney General’s statement:
I read with profound regret a press release emanating from the Honourable Speaker of the National Assembly criticizing the Executive Government’s resort to the Judiciary for legal redress against certain actions of and by the National Assembly.
The right to seek judicial redress against any perceived legal wrong or constitutional impropriety is one that is deeply rooted and cherished in our jurisprudence and legal system. The rule of law which ensures that all are equal in the eyes of the law and therefore, are subject to the legal process, are all fundamental pillars upon which the edifice of our legal system rests. They apply to the ordinary citizen of this land, the Executive Government and the National Assembly, alike. Therefore, if there is any violation of the law or the Constitution, any one aggrieved must have unhindered access to our courts for redress. It is in this context that the Executive’s recourse to legal proceedings must be viewed. It is unfortunate that the Honourable Speaker of the National Assembly perceives it through a different prism.
The Executive Government’s simple contention is that the National Assembly has acted beyond, ultra vires, and in breach of the Constitution, has usurped the functions of the Executive and has violated the doctrine of separation of powers upon which our Constitution is constructed, and it is seeking legal redress which it is constitutionally and democratically entitled to do. It is our view that the National Assembly, like every other creature of the Constitution, must act and function in the manner provided for and contemplated by the Constitution.  In this instance, it is our considered view that it has not.
It is also quite unfortunate that the Honourable Speaker, an attorney-at-law, has seen it fit to conclude that the very decisions of the National Assembly which are the subject of the legal challenge are “legitimate” and that the challenge itself is “unconstitutional”, when these are the very issues that are before the court for the court’s determination. By so doing, the Honourable Speaker himself has violated certain trite and axiomatic legal principles.
Needless to say that the Executive remains committed to a process which would achieve consensus and avoid litigation.