…AG says Court ruling cancels out no-confidence motion
…debunks claims by Jagdeo that bills passed by Parliament would be illegal

MINISTER of Legal Affairs and Attorney General, Basil Williams, has indicated that any Bill passed in the Parliament during this period— even as the no-confidence motion proceeds to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ)—will remain as legally passed.

In an invited comment by the Guyana Chronicle on Tuesday, the Attorney General debunked the recent statements of Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo, who suggested otherwise.

In a recent television interview, Jagdeo stated: “The consequences of the CCJ ruling that the no-confidence motion was validly passed by a 33-32 vote would mean that the government and all of its acts after March 21 would have been illegal because the Constitution will then kick in…it would invalidate anything that we’ve done in the Parliament because we would have illegally convened the Parliament.”

On Friday, the Court of Appeal ruled that the No-Confidence Motion was not validly passed in the National Assembly, thereby overturning the High Court’s decision of Chief Justice Roxane George-Wiltshire.
Before a packed courtroom, Chancellor of the Judiciary (ag) Yonette Cummings-Edwards and Justice of Appeal Dawn Gregory ruled that the Opposition needed 34 votes to defeat the Government and not 33.

Then on Tuesday, in a press release, Attorney-at-Law Mohabir Anil Nandlall indicated that a Notice of Application for Special Leave to the CCJ has been filed in the name of the Opposition Leader on March 26, 2019.

While the Attorney General did not indicate when the Government intends to head to Parliament, he assured that all actions within the chambers at this period will be legal. “There’s no impediment; there’s no restraint; there’s no no-confidence motion so everything will be lawful,” Williams said.

“The Court of Appeal ruling has effect as though there was never the passage of any no-confidence motion because they found that it was not validly passed.”
He added that should the CCJ rule in the future that the no-confidence motion was validly passed; any bills given passage by the Government will remain as passed.

Meanwhile, during a televised broadcast on Friday night, Vice President and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Carl Greenidge, while performing the functions of President said that steps will be taken to reconvene Parliament soonest. “The Parliament, acting upon the decision of the court, can meet as soon as it likes to address whatever it likes and to deal with Bills brought before it and motions brought before it however it likes,” he said.

Even as the People’s Progressive Party expects that the directions to be given by the CCJ will bring about an early hearing and determination of the appeal, the Attorney General said that the Government is ready to defend the decision of the Appellate Court.

He added that it might even be necessary for the Government to cross appeal which would see them requesting a review of a lower court’s decision. “We will be there to contest the appeal that will be filed. We will vigorously represent our case,” he said earlier on Tuesday.

Regarding the possibility of cross-appealing, Minister added: “I had raised several issues on whether the three-months was mandatory or directory; the whole question of severing the Cabinet from Government and a contention that the President and Government could remain in office after the expiration of the three months if no elections was held. We also would challenge [the contention] that it was the Government to hold elections instead of GECOM. There are several issues that we could [cross appeal] if it comes to that.”

The Attorney General and a battery of lawyers, in a series of arguments, submitted that the three-month provision in the Constitution, which provides for early elections, is not mandatory but rather directory.
They argued that the Article 106(7) of the Constitution can only be interpreted as directory since the government has no control over elections.

Under the current construct of the Constitution, only Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) can hold and supervise the conduct of elections independently.

Meanwhile, the Attorney General has also argued that the Constitution does not provide for the “immediate” resignation of Cabinet and that such a move would cripple the government’s ability to finance the holding of elections by GECOM and its ability to provide critical services to the people.

In the Notice of Application and Draft Order shared by Nandlall orders were made to appeal the decision of the local Appellate Court; to declare that 33 votes constitute a majority; that the no-confidence motion moved by Jagdeo was validly passed among others.