THE Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) on Friday dismissed an application filed by lawyers for recalled MP, Charrandass Persaud; Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo; and Chartered Accountant, Christopher Ram, asking the Trinidad and Tobago-based regional court to block the sitting of the National Assembly today.

In its terse ruling, the regional court stated that unless it reverses the decision of the Court of Appeal of Guyana dated the 22nd day of March 2019, which declared that the motion of no-confidence passed in the National Assembly on the 21st day of December 2018 was not validly passed, the status of the government and the National Assembly of Guyana is unaffected by the result of the vote on the motion of no-confidence of the 21st day of December 2018, presently before it.

The CCJ said that it would be imprudent in the circumstances, “for this Court to take the most unusual step of restraining the National Assembly from sitting as urged by the applicant.” The move by attorneys for the applicants was described by legal luminaries as inviting the regional court to breach the doctrine of separations of powers. On Wednesday, during a pretrial hearing on the three appeals challenging the decision of the Court of Appeal, Attorney for Persaud, Sanjeev Datadin, made an oral submission to the CCJ to block the Friday, April 26 sitting of the National Assembly.

While the National Assembly is expected to consider the Petroleum (Exploration and Production) (Tax Laws) Tullow Guyana B.v. Eco (Atlantic) Guyana Inc. and Total E and P Guyana BV Order, there is no legislation related to finances that would be considered on Friday. There are, however, several reports, on past contractual arrangements, and reports on a number of government entities.

Additionally, six bills will be introduced and read for the first time. These bills are: Interception of Communications (Amendment) Bill, Procurement (Amendment) Bill, Customs and Trade Single Window System Bill, Custom (Amendment of Schedules) Bill, National Accreditation Council (Amendment) Bill and National Accreditation Council Act 2004 (Validation) Bill. Earlier, Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister, Basil Williams, told this publication that Datadin was attempting to mislead the court into believing that the National Assembly on Friday would consider finances for the conduct of General and Regional Elections by the Guyana Elections Commission.

On the sideline of an engagement with diplomats from the UK and the US at his Chamber, Minister Williams told reporters that Datadin was attempting to “influence the court.” “This is a blatant attempt to influence the court and malign the government, and I don’t know why these attempts are being made to influence the court,” the attorney general said. He said the CCJ is a competent legal institution, and the government, unlike Datadin, does not get involved in such acts. “We leave [the matter to] the court because we believe that they have competent people who are qualified to administer justice as our final court,” the attorney general said.

Meanwhile, earlier in the day, government, in its affidavit in answer to Datadin’s application sworn to by State Solicitor, Jennifer Ayana Mc Calman, stated that Anessa Chow, Attorney-at-Law for Persaud, could not have sworn to an affidavit on his behalf and appear in the proceedings for him as this is ethically improper. Mc Calman’s affidavit was presented by Eamon Courtenay SC, Counsel for the Honourable Attorney General. She argued that there was no affidavit from Persaud in support of the application, noting that Persaud left Guyana for Canada on the 22 December 2018, the day following his vote in the National Assembly on the no-confidence motion. “To the best of my knowledge, information and belief, he has not returned to Guyana. Mr. Persaud is no longer a member of the National Assembly. He was removed on or about January 3, 2019 and he has not challenged his removal,” Mc Calman’s affidavit contends. “I have carefully read the notice of application and its supporting affidavit and I have not been able to discern any evidence or ground that shows how Mr. Persaud would be affected by, or prejudiced by, the sitting of the National Assembly.”

Additionally, Mc Calman’s said Chow states that she became aware of a sitting of the National Assembly on April 18, 2019, but did not offer any explanation as to what steps, if any, her client took, or any steps which she took to seek to stop the sitting of the National Assembly, since learning of the planned meeting. She also argued that the orders sought in the Notice of Application are extraordinary and that having regard to the separation of powers doctrine and the limited jurisdiction of the court to intervene prior to parliament acting as recognised in Bahamas District of the Methodist Church in the Caribbean and the Americas and Others v. The Hon. Vernon J. Symonette M.P. and seven Others [2000] UKPC 31 Mr. Persaud has no arguable case to support the application.