-nixes out-of-time appeal on Dipcon judgment
-AG signals move to CCJ, questions motive

ACTING Chancellor of the Judiciary, Carl Singh, on Wednesday threw out an appeal against the decision of the High Court last year to free Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo of a race-baiting charge, but Attorney General Basil Williams has signalled that he will file another appeal to the Caribbean Court of Justice.He said the Chancellor’s decision is a vain attempt to free Jagdeo because the case is appealable. Justice Singh’s decision comes amid deep concerns by the administration and other citizens regarding his decision in the dying days of his career on the bench to bring up two of the most controversial cases, which will impact Jagdeo. The other case is an appeal against a decision by former Chief Justice Ian Chang to scrap presidential term limits, on which he is set to rule on February 15, 2017.
Also in court on Wednesday, Justice Singh refused to allow an out-of-time appeal against a $446M judgement that was granted in favour of Dipcon Engineering Services Limited against the Government of Guyana. Dipcon had taken the government to court since 2009.
The court later awarded US$665,032.17(G$133M) together with US$1,563,368 (G$313M). The first sum was awarded for the “road-building and construction works” undertaken by Dipcon. The other sum was for the “increased cost incurred by Dipcon at the request of government.”

The government has to pay interest on both sums. It also has to pay six percent interest per annum from 2009 when the judgment was filed, to October 2015 and interest of four percent until the sum is fully paid. The Attorney General Chambers had missed the stipulated time to appeal the case, but later filed an out-of-time appeal, which the chancellor who heads the Appeal Court did not entertain.

Revocation of acting appointment
Political watchers said that government is not without options to halt any further move by Justice Singh and President David Granger can revoke his acting appointment as Chancellor before he proceeds on pre-retirement leave at the end of this month.
In his ruling, the Chancellor said the Deputy Solicitor-General, Prithima Kissoon, who filed the appeal on behalf of the AG,had conceded that Williams wasn’t a proper party to the matter. According to Justice Singh, the fact that Kissoon had conceded to Jagdeo’s lawyer Mursaline Bacchus’s contention that the AG was not a proper party to the proceeding was sufficient to dismiss the case. Approximately six months ago, Kissoon was required to file an affidavit in response to Bacchus’s contention against the Attorney General being named in the matter along with adding Magistrate Charlyn Artiga’s name to the appeal; this was not done.
Justice Singh said too that he finds the concession by the Deputy Solicitor-General to be of “great significance” and ruled that the appeal filed was null. However, when contacted, Williams told the Guyana Chronicle that he was not surprised by the action of the Deputy Solicitor- General. “She filed the appeal and her concession is unknown to me; she did not consult the Attorney General and she has absented herself for the month by submitting medical certificate after medical certificate; the judge ruled that the appeal is a nullity…and in favour of Jagdeo.”

Vain attempt
The Attorney General believes that the move by the Deputy Solicitor- General and the Chancellor is “a vain attempt to free Jagdeo of those cases,” while noting that it is a question of having all matters related to the former president dealt with before the Chancellor goes on pre-retirement leave at the end of this month.
“I am amused by it; the move by the Chancellor is not without remedy, we will take the case to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ); the case was dismissed on form and not substance…he hasn’t determined the substantive issue there,” declared Attorney General Williams.
Some senior attorneys had warned that the Chancellor will attempt to adjudicate political matters before he goes on pre-retirement leave on January 30. The Guyana Chronicle had reported that Justice Singh, whose substantive post is that of Chief Justice, is expected to begin pre-retirement leave in January, 2017 and is also expected to demit office by January 30, 2017.
A prominent attorney speaking under the condition of anonymity,has opined that Justice Singh may be politically motivated to take on new cases during the time he ought to be on pre-retirement leave. Justice Singh will celebrate his 65th birth anniversary on February 23.
“It must be ensured that the Chancellor does not take on any new cases, especially political cases. It is expected that he would want to start cases and then say he can’t go on leave, as he will have to conclude the cases,” said the prominent attorney.

The Guyana Chronicle understands that Kissoon ,unknown to Williams, had conceded by virtue of an oral statement which followed the submission of a written statement one day later. Attorney Judy Stuart worked alongside Kissoon on the case, but Stuart was never briefed by the Deputy Solicitor- General on her conceding in the matter, this newspaper was told.
The Guyana Chronicle understands that Stuart was shocked when she was informed that Kissoon had conceded. This newspaper was reliably informed that Kissoon made an application for leave to the Attorney General to be off work from December 20, 2016 to January 21, 2017, but that leave was denied. Shortly after, the Deputy Solicitor- General submitted several medical certificates indicating her unfitness to be at work.

Babu Jaan
Last year, Justice Navindra Singh had ruled that the facts submitted in the case of racial incitement made by Christopher Ram against Jagdeo were insufficient to amount to an offence for which Jagdeo should be charged. During a speech at Babu Jaan, Corentyne, Jagdeo was accused of racial incitement when he said, “The opposition consistently shouts about the racism of the PPP, but they practise racism. The opposition beat drums at six in the morning and say let us throw out those coolie people.”
Ram had filed the matter in April, 2015 at the Whim Magistrate’s Court, Corentyne, Berbice and the charge being that the former president uttered words to cause racial or ethnic hatred, contrary to Section 139 D (1) (a) of the Representation of the People Act, Chapter 1:03.
Section 139D (1) (a) of the Representation of the People Act, CAP 1:03 of the Laws of Guyana, provides that any person who makes or publishes any statement which results or can result in racial or ethnic hatred among the people shall be liable to conviction.
The case was being heard by Magistrate Charlyn Artiga at the Whim Magistrates’ Court, but Jagdeo through his attorney Murseline Bacchus argued that the charge was frivolous and vexatious and requested it be dismissed, while questioning the jurisdiction of Magistrate Charlyn Artiga to hear the matter. By virtue of the matter put before Justice William Ramlal, an Order/ Rule Nisi of Certiorari directing Artiga to show cause why a Writ/Order of Certiorari should not be issued against her and to quash her decision in the ruling of the private criminal case.