Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo has reprimanded Attorney General Basil Williams and the State-run Guyana Chronicle newspaper over recent attacks on acting Chancellor of the Judiciary, Justice Carl Singh, following a ruling which dismissed a State-sponsored appeal against a High Court decision quashing a racial incitement charge against Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo.
Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo
The apparent intimidation campaign, which was being peddled by the State’s newspaper attributed comments to the Attorney General expressing displeasure with rulings made by the Chancellor, stressing the point that the “sun is setting” on the Chancellor’s career with his pending retirement.
However, Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo, who is currently acting President, during his feature address at the opening of the annual Police Conference on Thursday morning, pointed out that the A Partnership for National Unity/Alliance For Change (APNU/AFC) Government does not support any such attacks on the Judiciary even if it is coming from its own officers.
“In as much as any citizen, or the Government for that matter, may criticise decisions emanating from our courts which, after all, are not cloistered halls immune from public scrutiny our Government does not encourage attacks on the Legislature and Judiciary. It is not Government’s policy or decision to besmirch the character of any judicial officer. Our Government would not condone attempts, however well-meaning or veiled, to impugn the integrity of judicial officers,” Nagamootoo asserted.
Chancellor of the Judiciary (ag), Justice Carl Singh
The Prime Minister further underscored the need to respect the various tenets of democracy, such as the separation of powers that guide the Executive in its relations with the Legislature and the Judiciary. To this end, he posited that his Administration has been leading the way in ensuring the independence of both the Legislature and the Judiciary by making them financially and administratively autonomous.
Nagamootoo’s statement comes in light of comments made by former Speaker Ralph Ramkarran last weekend, when he called out the Prime Minister, who has responsibility of the State media, for being silent on the matter, noting that the attacks on the Chancellor seemed to be a government policy.
Disassociation
Attorney General Basil Williams
However, Prime Minister Nagamootoo was quick to distance himself from the articles published in the Guyana Chronicle. “… while I would not interfere with editorial discretion, I disassociate myself from perceived scurrilous attacks in the Chronicle newspapers against the acting Chancellor of the Judiciary who will, less than a month from now, demit his substantive office as Chief Justice at the end of a distinguished career,” he remarked.
Meanwhile, at a press conference on Wednesday, Attorney General Basil Williams further insisted that the acting Chancellor needs to retire, noting that he should have already proceeded on preretirement leave in preparation for his official retirement date on January 30, 2017.
“I would expect that the Chancellor would also proceed on preretirement leave and then leave on his birthday (anniversary) as he had advised me that should be the position of Acting Chief Justice (Ian) Chang at the time,” Williams pointed out.
However, Chancellor Singh last week posited that he intends to continue functioning until his constitutional tenure expires next month. “Not when the Chronicle says I must leave. My constitutional tenure expires on the 23rd of February, 2017, and until such time unless my appointment is revoked, I intend to exercise my functions as a Judge,” he affirmed to reporters.
Third term case
According to the Constitution, the Chancellor demits office at age 68, however that has no bearing on Justice Singh as he is acting Chancellor and not substantive Chancellor. Justice Singh will be turning 65 on February 23, 2017. Justice Singh has been acting Chancellor since 2005, after Justice Desiree Bernard demitted office; she served from 2001-2005. Last week Government spokesperson, Natural Resources Minister Raphael Trotman, has stated that Government is aware of the Chancellor’s impending retirement and will hold discussions on same.
The apparent push for Justice Singh to retire by January month-end comes in light of the impending ruling on the appeal to the two-term presidential limit case set for February 15. The Chancellor is expected set to rule on the State’s appeal made against the decision by former Chief Justice Ian Chang that the presidential term limit is unconstitutional.
Many commentators including the former Speaker of the National Assembly and former President Bharrat Jagdeo believes that the Government is attempting to intimidate the members of the Judiciary and send a warning of what will happen if they make rulings undesirable to the APNU/AFC Administration.
On the other hand, Guyana Bar Association (GBA) has not taken kindly to the actions of Attorney General Williams. According to former President and current committee member of the Bar Association, Teni Housty, the Government should remain conscious of the importance of maintaining the Judiciary’s independence and impartiality.
Clashes with Judiciary
He noted that for the Executive to be clashing with the Judiciary over its decisions, instead of respecting its authority to make those decisions, jeopardised the concept of separation of power.
“There is an old adage: “When elephants rumble, the grass gets hurt”. When the Executive and the Judiciary clash, it’s the administration of justice that suffers. And (they) have to be conscious of the damage that is done to the administration of justice,” Housty pointed out while adding that “… when the Executive seeks to comment on the judicial administration of justice, the lines between the doctrines of separation of power are blurred and can be obliterated.”
The Attorney called for an “independent and impartial judiciary, immune from effect and statements from any other branch of Government” to be maintained. He made it clear that attacks against the Judiciary, above which the Chancellor presides, should never happen.
“The whole system of administration of justice, the confidence in the independence and impartiality of the Judiciary, all of those things go and the ultimate rule of law suffers,” he posited.
