TALK of a constitutional crisis as a result of the recent ruling of Chief Justice Ian Chang on the 2012 Budget cuts which were made by the combined Opposition have been debunked by Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall.In an interview with the Guyana Chronicle, he said, “What ‘constitutional crisis’ means in this context (the Chief Justice’s ruling) is not explained by those who are making such wanton predictions.”

He flayed the leaders of A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) and the Alliance For Change (AFC), David Granger and Khemraj Ramjattan respectively, for making such claims.

“I consider such statements to be irresponsible and reckless, in that they can convey the impression to the citizens, the business sector and internationally that Guyana is on the precipice of some constitutional catastrophe,” Nandlall said.

According to him, such an impression can create unnecessary tension, fears and uncertainty, all which are wholly without any factual or legal basis.

He said, “These statements are coming from persons in authority and who are presumed to know better.”

CONSEQUENCES
The AG explained that, in his view, the Chief Justice’s ruling can result in three possible eventualities. He said, “Three consequences can flow from the Chief Justice’s ruling:
(a) The budget is passed as presented by the Finance Minister
(b) The Opposition withholds their support for certain parts of the budget, in which case the Finance Minister will amend his estimates to capture the approval of the Opposition
(c) The third possibility is that the Opposition may withhold their support from the entire budget. If this occurs, then General Elections MAY be — not MUST be — a consequence.”

Nandlall stressed that none of the three eventualities can be described as a constitutional crisis. He said, “I presume that those who predict this constitutional crisis are referring to the holding of national elections. How the holding of national elections can amount to a constitutional crisis is indeed mind-boggling.”

Nandlall made it clear that national elections are a process prescribed by the Constitution. In other words, it is a constitutional process, and can never be described as a “constitutional crisis”.

APPEALS
Asked about the commitments made by the Opposition Leaders’ pledges to pursue appeals of the Chief Justice’s ruling, the AG said only the Speaker of the National Assembly can make an appeal to the local Court of Appeal.

He said, “In terms of the appeal, in my view Mr. Granger cannot appeal the Chief Justice’s final ruling because, at that stage of the proceedings, he was no longer a party, having being struck out earlier.”

He added that Granger had appealed to the Full Court the Chief Justice’s decision to strike him out. “That Court, comprising Justices Rishi Persaud and Bovell-Drakes, dismissed his appeal on the ground that it was filed in the wrong court, and therefore that court had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter,” Nandlall said.

According to him, any appeal referred to by Granger must be an appeal against the Full Court’s ruling, and not the Chief Justice’s ruling.

“Such an appeal will lie, in my view, with the Court of Appeal. In any event, such an appeal will only address the issue of whether the Full Court was right or wrong in declining jurisdiction, and nothing else,” he said.

The AG noted that he is doubtful of the “practical value” of such an appeal at this stage.

RESPECTED
Nandlall told the Guyana Chronicle that the Government expects that the Chief Justice’s ruling will be respected and obeyed.
He said, “I observed in the press the notion being peddled that the Chief Justice’s ruling mandates the Opposition either to approve the entire Budget, or to reject the entire Budget.
In my considered view, nothing in the Chief Justice’s ruling, either expressly or by implication, can lead to such a conclusion or inference. The Chief Justice has ruled that the National Assembly has no legal or constitutional power to amend the estimates of the Finance Minister by way of reduction or increase; and that the Opposition in the National Assembly has a power of approval (not disapproval), or a power to withhold their approval from those parts of the Budget which do not meet their approval.

“In such an eventuality, the Finance Minister will have to amend his estimates to meet the approval of the Opposition of the National Assembly.”

The national budget is expected to be presented to the National Assembly in March; and, to date, other than the pledge to appeal the decision, there has been no word from the combined Opposition on the next move as it relates to the 2014 Budget.
Written By Vanessa Narine