…AG dismisses Nandlall’s claim that gov’t cannot recall ambassadors
…says gov’t remains in interim mode; would not give away oil blocks

By Lisa Hamilton

GOVERNMENT on Wednesday dismissed comments made by PPP MP Anil Nandlall that the administration could not recall ambassadors and that all of its actions post- September 19, 2019 were illegal.

Nandlall, who is currently facing larceny charges in the magistrate’s court for alleged theft of government law books, told the Guyana Times that the interim government could not recall ambassadors as was announced earlier this week. He said too that a lot of the spending which the administration engaged in was illegal and will be subject to review in any future government.

Earlier this week the Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that a decision has been taken to bring to an end the services of a number of Heads of Missions, especially those who might have enjoyed extended tours of duty beyond the official limit.  “As it is well known, the tenure of an ambassador runs to approximately three to five years. However, for a variety of reasons and factors, some of our ambassadors have been abroad for as long as two decades.  This situation has become an impediment to other younger and rising foreign service officers whose performance and professional competence might require that they be appointed to the summit of the Foreign Service. A subsequent announcement will be made on this particular matter,” the statement added. “It is the wish and expectation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that this statement on the ongoing exercise within the ministry will help to allay any concerns and put to rest any and all surmisings and/or misrepresentations that may have arisen in the public domain concerning this normal administrative undertaking,” the statement concluded.

Responding to Nandlall’s claims, Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs Basil Williams said though the government is now in an interim mode, in accordance with the declarations of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), it retains its full panoply of legal powers. He said the administration is fully aware of what it can do and cannot do. “We will not give away oil blocks like the PPP; we will not engage in Amaila-type contracts like the PPP did. We recognised what we can do and we have been doing just that and operating within the confines of the law,” Williams told the Guyana Chronicle in an interview.

He said as an interim government they can do things that are reversible and as such, “If Mr Nandlall who is before the court for allegedly stealing government properties and the rest of the PPP want to reverse the salary increases given to public servants and the various improvements in the lives of Guyanese, they can do just that when they come back into government in the next 40 years.”

The AG reiterated that the President David Granger Administration respects the declarations and orders of the court and accepted that it is in an interim mode. He explained, however, that while the CCJ declared that the administration is now in an “interim mode,” it did not specify what “an interim government” is. The country’s constitution, he said, does not address the notion of an interim government. In its ruling the CCJ President Adrian Saunders explained that in mandating that the government remain in office notwithstanding its defeat and the resignation of the President and the Cabinet, Article 106 requires that Cabinet’s tenure in office be on a different footing from that which existed before the no-confidence motion.

Guidance given

He posited that the Chancellor of the Judiciary Justice Yonette Cummings-Edwards, in citing Hogg – the Canadian Constitutional expert, was right to note that: “…the government continues in office as an interim government until the next elections ensue and a President is appointed (or re-appointed) depending on the results of that elections.”
Justice Saunders told the parties in the matter, “by convention, the government is expected to behave as an interim government and so restrain the exercise of its legal authority.” He added: “It is this interim role that explains the three-month deadline, in the first instance that the Article lays down, in principle, for the holding of the fresh elections.”
Williams said the administration has now turned to the work of Hogg in keeping with the advice of the judiciary. “On a proper perusal of the book, they say clearly that the government retains it panoply of powers,” the attorney general said while underscoring the importance of governing the country. He posited that to strip the government of its legal powers would be a recipe for anarchy. “In Guyana we have to continue [to] govern, lest we are overrun by narco traffickers, those who are trafficking persons, of course because of the porosity of our borders,” Williams reasoned.

Abiding by the constitution

President Granger also on several occasions reiterated that his government was operating within its interim mode. He said apart from health reasons, he has not accepted any invitations for state visits while many of his government’s core functions have been restricted.
“Many of my ministers have had their travels restricted; we cannot plan a budget or bring a budget to Parliament and we cannot engage in certain types of projects which are regarded as irreversible and the whole business of the government has been slow because we are obedient to and compliant with the instructions of the CCJ (Caribbean Court of Justice) since July,” the President has said.

Sabotage
For his Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo, while dismissing Nandlall’s comments, said the views are tantamount to sabotage and can cause insurrection. “Clearly it is designed to intimidate public servants and sabotage of the country,” PM Nagamootoo said. On the same matter, Minister of Finance Winston Jordan summarised Nandlall’s remarks as “grandstanding.”

“We don’t have to worry about this nonsense about September, that has been debunked a long time ago, especially by the High Court…if they knew the spending was illegal they would have run to the court. The amount of time that they ran to the court for this year alone would attest that if they knew the funding was illegal they would have already run to the court to get an injunction. So it’s a lot of grandstanding that is going on…I continue to assure people that all acts that we are doing are legal and in keeping with [the court’s ruling].