DPP drops law books larceny charge against AG

…SOCU withheld evidence from the court – AG’s Attorney

More than three years after now Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister, Anil Nandlall was charged with Larceny by Bailee for allegedly converting $2 million in Law Reports belonging to the State to his own use and benefit, the charge against him has been withdrawn by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Shalimar Ali-Hack.

This was confirmed by one of Nandlall’s lawyers, Glenn Hanoman, who on Monday told Guyana Times, “She [the DPP] rightfully exercised her discretion to withdraw the charge.” According to Hanoman, in a letter dated September 17, 2020, to trial Magistrate Fabayo, the DPP instructed that the charges against the Attorney General be discontinued.
Magistrate Azore complied with the DPP’s directives last week Friday, October 16, 2020. Hanoman further explained that because of the powers invested in the DPP pursuant to Article 187 of the Constitution of Guyana, she has the discretion to withdraw any prosecution.
The charge against Nandlall had alleged that between May 18, 2015, and May 29, 2015, while being a bailee, in his capacity as Attorney General under the PPP/C Administration, he fraudulently converted 14 Commonwealth Law Reports valued at $2,313,853, property of the Ministry of Legal Affairs, to his own use and benefit.
He had pleaded not guilty to the charges and was released on his own recognisance (self-bail).

In November 2018, following the close of the prosecution’s case, one of Nandlall lawyers made a no-case submission. However, Magistrate Azore overruled the no-case submission on the basis that a prima facie [sufficient to establish a fact] case had been made out against him.
As such, the Magistrate had called on Nandlall to lead a defence.
Reluctant to do so as they insisted the charges against him were bad in law, Nandlall’s lawyers filed judicial review proceedings in the High Court. In the application, the lawyers asked for a declaration that the offence Larceny by a Bailee is an offence unknown to the laws of Guyana, and therefore is in violation of Articles 40, 144 (4) and 149 (d) of the Constitution.
Further, his lawyers had contended that Magistrate Azore erred in law when she overruled the no-case submission and refused to give sufficient reasons for doing so as required by Section 15 Judicial Review Act. This, they argued, was also in contravention of the Constitution.
However, Nandlall’s application was struck out by both the High Court and Court of Appeal following full hearings. The courts ruled that Section 165 of the Criminal Law (Offences) Act makes provisions for the charge instituted against the Attorney General and that Magistrate Azore was not inclined to provide reasons as to why she overruled the no-case submission.

During the High Court leg of the matter, Chief Justice Roxane George had noted that it is at the Magistrate’s discretion to overrule a no-case submission. While she underscored that the High Court can exercise its supervisory jurisdiction to review such a decision by a Magistrate, this is only done in extreme and limited circumstances.
According to the Chief Justice, moving to the High Court for a review in such circumstance should not be routine, since it would trample upon the process of criminal trials in the Magistrates’ Courts. Nandlall had appealed the ruling of the Court of Appeal to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).

Withheld evidence
According to Hanoman, the SOCU Prosecutor on the case withheld evidence from the court and the defence. Nandlall’s lawyer disclosed that the evidence had to do with a statement given to Police by former President Donald Ramotar.
The lawyer said that the evidence also included a report by the Auditor General which revealed that the Law Reports did not belong to the Ministry of Legal Affairs, and were in fact, part of Nandlall’s entitlement under his employment contract.
“The Auditor General’s Report and President Ramotar’s statement established the facts,” Hanoman noted.
Hanoman said: “The case was not completed. We still had our defence to lead. Had we lead our defence, President Ramotar would have given evidence that the Government continued to pay for his [Nandlall’s] subscription for the law books which were part of his employment contract.”
“The charge was brought because some politically motivated person in the [Attorney General] Chambers decided to ignore and disregard the official findings of the Auditor General,” Hanoman added.

Contractual agreement
Nandlall was charged and placed before the courts in April 2017 after investigations by the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU) – an arm of the Guyana Police Force. He had always maintained that the law book belonged to him.
In doing so, he had explained that when he was appointed Attorney General in 2011, he requested as part of his contract of service, for the Government of Guyana to stand the expense for his subscriptions for the Commonwealth Law Books.
He had subscribed to Lexis Nexis, the publishers of the law reports. Insisting that nothing was abnormal about the practice, he had argued that it was done by other Government Ministries such as Finance and Health.
He had expressed awareness that for decades prior, the Government had paid for professional and technical publications, journals, periodicals and magazines. He had said that the arrangement received the blessings of then Head of State Donald Ramotar.
However, investigators contended that because the books were bought with State funds, they cannot be the property of Nandlall, and in fact, the State should not have entered into such an arrangement in the first place.
The Ministry of Legal Affairs under the APNU/AFC Government had said that there was no evidence of an agreement between Nandlall and Ramotar. And even assuming that there was such an agreement, they further contended that the use of public funds in that manner is a flagrant violation of the Financial Management and Accountability Act.
Nandlall had maintained that the charge laid against him by SOCU was instigated by Basil Williams, who was appointed Attorney General in 2015, when the APNU/AFC came into Government, and whose performance he has always criticised.