CHIEF (ag) Ian Chang has ruled that the Opposition has no right to cut the country’s budget estimates and can only approve or disapprove the entire budget or sections of it.
The Chief Justice handed down his decision in the High Court yesterday with the Opposition planning to appeal the decision, citing errors in the ruling.The Government of Guyana had taken the Opposition to court following the slashing of the 2012 National Budget by $20.8B claiming it was unconstitutional. In the Preliminary Ruling given in June 2012, the CJ had ruled that the National Assembly had a role to either approve or disapprove of the National Estimate, not to cut them. In yesterday’s final ruling, the CJ maintained his sentiments made in the Preliminary Ruling.
“The Speaker unfortunately has ruled that the Standing Orders empower the Opposition to cut the Budget that the Chief Justice has ruled is wrong. The Standing Orders cannot overrule the Constitution of Guyana, they are not the law, they do not constitute a power, and therefore they cannot confer a power which does not exist in law,” Minister Nandlall stated.
He expressed the hope that this statement will guide treatment of the Budget for 2014 and onwards.
Pointing out that he was told that he was challenging the sovereignty of Parliament when he filed the Budget 2012 court sase, Minister Nandlall said that the ruling leaves him very pleased. The Constitution confers upon the State the power and mechanisms to ensure that it maintains and enjoys that power.
Meanwhile, Leader of the Alliance for Change (AFC) Khemraj Ramjattan announced that an appeal will be made within a few days. “We feel that we still have the power in Parliament to cut the estimates, the Standing Orders say that we can. But the chief justice says that is not law; well we will go to the Court of Appeal and get them to say that it is law,” Ramjattan stated.
Attorney General Nandlall on January 13 won the case against Leader of the Opposition, David Granger who had appealed the decision of Chang to strike him and Finance Minister Dr. Ashni Singh from the 2012 Budget Cut court case.
On June 19, 2013, the decision was taken by the Chief Justice to dismiss the two from the case, on the grounds that as Members of Parliament, the constitution provides them with immunity. Granger sought to waive his immunity in an appeal which the AG disagreed with, arguing that it is not immunity, but a prohibition which could expose all other Parliamentarians. He said for the Opposition leader to waive his rights to immunity, legislation has to be passed, amending the current law before this can happen.
Justices James Bovell-Drakes and Rishi Persaud however ruled that the Full Court had no jurisdiction to hear such an appeal which must be made to the Court of Appeal.
AG Nandlall explained that his first submission which was made against the appeal was that the Court had no jurisdiction to hear the case.  Further, the ruling by the Chief Justice in June 2013 was a final one which brought to an end all matters relating to the Finance Minister and Opposition Leader Granger regarding the Budget Cut case. This meant that the Full Court should first determine whether it had the right to hear the case. The ruling supported the submission made by the AG.
The budget cut case is related to the 2012 National Budget which was slashed by the Parliamentary Opposition, leading to the Government taking legal action on the basis that the Opposition has no power to cut the budget, but to either approve or disapprove of it.
The National Communications Network (NCN), Government Information Agency (GINA), the Guyana Elections Commission, Office of the President, Office of the Prime Minister, the Amaila Falls Project, Amerindian land titling, Amerindian Development Fund, small and micro enterprise, Cunha Canal, the Customs Anti-Narcotics Unit (CANU), the State Planning Secretariat and the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC) were among the agencies and offices whose budgets were cut in 2012.
The Chief Justice, in a preliminary ruling, had said that the National Assembly cannot cut the budget and that the Finance Minister has the authority to allocate monies as needed. But the Opposition, again in 2013, despite the ruling, slashed over $30B from the estimates, prompting a return to the court for a final ruling.
The cuts had effectively stymied vital and transformative projects. Among the agencies and projects affected were the Guyana Power and Light (GPL) with $5.2B cut from its $10.2B allocation, Ministry of Public Works’ entire Transport Programme’s allocation of $5.6B, Specialty Hospital Project’s $1.2B and $19B of the Low Carbon Development Programme’s $20B allocation. GINA and NCN also had their allocations cut. (GINA)