…Attorney-General Williams

THE Government’s Legal Affairs Minister and Attorney General, Basil Williams, is prepared to defend the constitutionality of the State Asset Recovery Agency (SARA) legislation which has come under question by economist and former presidential advisor, Ramon Gaskin.
On Thursday last, Gaskin caused his lawyers to file legal proceedings against the SARA legislation in a bid to have it scrapped.

Minister Williams told the Guyana Chronicle that he has not yet seen the challenge, and is unaware as to whether the document was served on his office since he had been at Parliament last Friday.
He noted however that his office is ready to “vigorously” defend the recently passed SARA legislation, which speaks directly to reclaiming state property.
Williams pointed out that SARA’s legislation is in keeping with the United Nations (2003) Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) which was ratified by Guyana in 2008.

He noted that the focus of the international agreement is on “… criminal regimes, whereby there is a civil recovery of state property that was obtained by unlawful means.” In the reclaiming of state property from illegal holders, the Attorney General said that there is adequate protection for person’s rights where those concerns exist since, “everything the SARA director does must get the blessings of the court.”
On the legality of the legislation and its violation of the nation’s substantive laws, the attorney general is adamant that there can be no constitutional protection where state property has been illegally acquired.

The AG indicated that based on the information that is in the public domain, the challenge has erred in balancing the civil nature of the legislation from any criminal proceedings, since the aim is toward the recovery of assets, and not criminal action against individuals. He said the particular law goes after the state asset, not the individual.
Gaskin, who is a Russia-trained lawyer, told the newspaper that he was challenging the government on the constitutionality of the SARA legislation as a concerned citizen, since he felt it encroached on substantive legislation already governing the country. He said the SARA legislation for example encroaches on citizens’ rights to their property, since SARA’s director could get a restraining order for a suspected property in the absence of its owner.
Gaskin claims that in his perusal of the SARA legislation, he found as many as 80 sections and subsections that violate the Constitution, some of which include Articles 142, 144, 146, 212, and 216, among several others.

Gaskin is being represented by Attorneys Christopher Ram and Davindra Kissoon. When contact was made with Kissoon last Friday, he directed the newspaper to court documents. The documents said that the “unconstitutional” SARA law interferes with the legal professional privilege, it gives the director of SARA “impermissible” powers, reverses the evidential burden of proof, interferes with citizens’ right to privacy and the violation of separation of powers among several other claims.
On the powers of the SARA director, one area of concern for the attorneys was that the director and named SARA agents could be designated powers of a police, immigration or custom’s officer, if a such a requested is granted by the designated authorities.