ALLOW me to respond to a letter by one M. A. Bacchus, published in the April 20 edition of the Kaieteur News.  In that letter, Mr. Bacchus attempted to ascribe to the Hon Attorney General a quality that seems to be characteristic of him, the owner and  publisher of the Kaieteur News and Opposition Members of Parliament – “Empty barrels make the most noise.”

It is a verifiable fact that for the past one and a half years, Mr.  Nandlall has been doing what no other Attorney General or for that matter no lawyer ever did. That is, he has been educating the public on complex legal issues and concepts using the simplest of language and examples, especially on what have been taking place in the Parliament, from the budget cut of 2012 to the gagging of Minister Rohee.
As a result, thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of Guyanese, who are not of a legal mind have been able to clearly understand the complex legal issues facing the Government in Parliament since the Opposition gained a one-seat majority. In fact, before the Mr. Nandlall took to the airwaves, television stations and community meetings, very few Guyanese had any understanding of what is meant by the concept of “Separation of Powers”.
This is a concept that the PNC and AFC do not want the citizens of Guyana to understand, because if they do they would understand how the Opposition is trying to use their one-seat majority to steal the government. They would understand that none, not the Parliament as a body, the Speaker of the Parliament or the President can disregard the ruling of a court of law.  Thanks to the Hon. Attorney General, most Guyanese now understand what is meant by the concept of the separation of powers of the state and the rule of Law.
Mr. Bacchus in his rambling around the interpretation of the Chief Justice’s ruling seems to have forgotten that the ruling is a public document written in very simple and unambiguous language for anyone to understand. The Chief Justice’s ruling is available and accessible to anyone, including Mr. Bacchus. I am not aware that the Attorney General has laid any exclusive claim to the interpretation of the ruling. All he is saying is that the Chief Justice’s ruling must be respected and if you do not agree there are avenues for legal redress. I am not aware that the opposition has made any attempt to utilise any of the available avenues.
It therefore, appears that the only people in Guyana who are incapable of reading and understanding the Chief Justice’s ruling is the thirty three (33) or I should say the thirty four(34) Opposition members of parliament, including the Speaker.
Here is an interesting question for all:is it not strange that, not one of Guyana’s legal luminaries has publicly disagreed with the Chief Justice’s ruling or has publicly supported the Opposition or the Speakers disregard of it?  There is an even more interesting question that needs to be answered, but by the Speaker himself:why, unlike in the gagging of Rohee matter where he sought the opinion of our legal luminaries, who, by the way, by no stretch of imagination can be considered pro-government, but chose not to seek their opinion on the even more important issue of Chief Justice’s ruling on the 2012 budget cuts?  Is the Speaker afraid of being proven wrong again?  Mr. Speaker, I am challenging you to do the same again.
Mr. Bacchus I am sure is old enough to know that not a single Attorney General before Mr. Nandlall had to face the challenges he has been facing for the past year and a half. Such challenges could not have arisen because the configuration of Guyana’s Parliament was never the way it is today.  And from all indications, the Attorney General has been confronting these challenges a most civilised way. His significant successes over the past year and a half are admirable and speak for themselves. You may have not noticed, but Mr. Nandlall is creating a new political culture in Guyana, one where the rule of law must reign.  He has also been a huge inspiration not only to young and aspiring lawyers, but to young politicians as well.
Sadly, but the works and achievements of most of the world’s greatest men, from the days of Socrates, the father of western philosophy  were never recognised during their lifetimes and so may those of the young Attorney General, Mr. Nandlall. His efforts to make the rule of law an integral part of Guyana’s political culture would definitely not go unrecognised. And regardless of what people like Mr. Bacchus may want to make the public believe or think about Mr. Nandlall, he has grown, in a very short period of time to be one of Guyana’s most admired, if not the most admired young politician and lawyer. We must learn to recognise our heroes while they are alive and contributing to humanity.
I therefore urge Mr. Nandlall to continue to face the enemies of the people of Guyana with the most potent weapon man has ever devised – the rule of law.