COME October 16, 2019, at the High Court, Acting Chief Justice, Roxane George-Wiltshire, is expected to rule in the case filed by People’s Progressive Party (PPP) Attorney-at-Law, Anil Nandlall, for an order, compelling Cabinet, including the President, to resign.
On that date also, the Chief Justice (ag) is set make her ruling in the Notice of Application (NOA) filed by Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Basil Williams, who is asking for the Court to throw out the Fixed Date Application (FDA) filed by Nandlall.
Nandlall had filed a FDA seeking an order compelling the Cabinet to resign. He had said that such ought to be the consequence of the no-confidence motion passed against the government last December, in accordance with Article 106 (6) of the Constitution.
Nandlall is also seeking a Conservatory Order restraining the Cabinet, inclusive of the President, from meeting, making decisions as, or performing the functions of the Cabinet.
The Attorney General had moved to the court and filed a NOA and laid down more than 10 grounds why Nandlall’s FDA should be quashed, since it was an abuse of the court process.
On Friday, October 04, 2019, hearing commenced in the two matters. Williams, was accompanied by Solicitor General Nigel Hawke and Deputy Solicitor General, Debra Kumar. Nandlall was accompanied by attorney-at-law Kamal Ramkarran.
Attorney-at-law Ramkarran said that the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) did not give direction to the resignation of the cabinet and president, but omitted to grant such order.
As such, he is asking the lower court (High Court) to grant what was omitted by the CCJ.
However this did not sit well with the Chief Justice who replied “If the higher court chose not to make it, how can the lower court do so”
Ramkarran however argued that the lower court has jurisdiction over such matter, but the Chief Justice said “the CCJ’s decision was clear”
Solicitor General Nigel Hawke said that the applicant (Nandlall) represented the Leader of the Opposition, Bharrat Jagdeo, in the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) Appeal case Bharrat Jagdeo v. AG & Others and had actively participated in the proposals for consequential orders of that court – the country’s final appellate court. For that reason, Nandlall is fully aware of the orders the CCJ made in the ‘no-confidence appeals.’
Hawke argued that one of the proposals was for the President and the Cabinet to immediately resign and vacate office, but the CCJ refused to make such an order and clearly outlined that the Cabinet and President remain in office but on a different footing in the nature of a caretaker government,
FDA, he said is an abuse of the court since the learned CJ dealt with that issue, it went to the CCJ. The CCJ rejected it clearly and said that the government remains in a different mode.
Nandlall’s FDA has already been ventilated by the CCJ when it handed down several consequential orders. The CCJ, in arriving at its decision, had said that the Chancellor of the Judiciary, Yonette Cummings-Edwards in citing Hogg, the Canadian constitutional expert, was right to note that, “By convention, the government is expected to behave during this interim period as a caretaker and so restrain the exercise of its legal authority.
“It is an attempt to turn what we understand as the hierarchy system (CCJ) in our judiciary upside down” Hawke said as he made reference to the FDA.
He also stressed that if the applicant had found an error in the ruling of the CCJ, the applicant can go back for clarification since that cannot be dealt with at the lower court.
The Chief Justice ordered that submissions be handed in by October 9, 2019 and set October 16, 2019 for decision in both matters.
