–  deliberate ploy to delay proceedings  –  AG
AFTER being granted almost four weeks to prepare their arguments, the parliamentary opposition yesterday were unprepared to defeat what they have publicly termed a misconceived, weak and heavily flawed case brought by the government. Attorney-General and Minister of Legal Affairs Anil Nandlall voiced this sentiment after the hearing yesterday in the Chambers of the Chief Justice (ag) Ian Chang, where government sought to have an Interim Order granted for the Finance Minister to access funds that were cut from the national budget in April of this year.
Vehement objections from the Attorney-General led to the Court granting only one week more rather than the two weeks requested by the opposition to prepare arguments. The case has been adjourned to July 10.
Nandlall stated that asking for more time “is a deliberate strategy to prolong and protract the matter.” He explained that, on the last occasion they were granted three weeks to prepare their submissions.

“When they first appeared they had a battery of lawyers. But at Tuesday’s hearing, only Llewellyn John represented A Partnership for National Unity when the Alliance ForChange made their submissions. This morning (yesterday) Deborah Backer, Joseph Harmon and Basil Williams turned up, unprepared to present arguments as they were ordered to do three weeks ago, and then proceeded to request an adjournment for two weeks, seeking further time to prepare,” Nandlall said.
The Legal Affairs Minister denounced the action of the opposition, pointing to the fact that since they have termed the case weak and ill conceived, “one would have expected as competent lawyers they would have had no difficulty in demolishing the case in the shortest possible time,” the Government Information Agency (GINA) quoted him as saying.

‘UNPREPARED’: Deborah Backer, Joseph Harmon and Basil Williams turned up in court yesterday unprepared to present arguments.

While they have been unable to do so, Minister Nandlall pointed out that more importantly, “I believe that it is a deliberate ploy to delay these proceedings to force the government to dismiss hundreds of employees and to shut down vital programmes and offices which would have devastating consequences on ordinary working people, so they can score cheap political points.”
Senior Counsel Seenath Jairam representing the government stated on Tuesday when the case resumed that under Article 65, “Parliament may make laws for the peace, order and the good governance of Guyana. You cannot reduce the budget by $1, causing people who are employed by the state agencies to be dismissed through no fault of their own. That is chaos.”
He also noted that despite the fact that there have been no dismissals to date, ‘there will have to be. If monies are not approved how are they to be paid? …Common sense tells us that unless monies are voted for the particular areas, there will have to be dislocation in employment.”
It has also been noted that should the lack of finance lead to the dismissal of state employees, it would critically affect the business of the state, and frustrate the governance of the nation.
The opposition continues to insist that the National Assembly has the power to reduce and cut the national budget.