Public Service Commission: CJ throws out GPSU’s challenge to Mohandatt Goolsarran’s appointment

…says not a “scintilla” of evidence; “unmeritorious, frivolous, and vexatious”

Acting Chief Justice Roxane George, SC, has dismissed the Guyana Public Service Union’s (GPSU) challenge to the appointment of Mohandatt Goolsarran to the recently sworn-in Public Service Commission (PSC), declaring that it contained not a “scintilla of evidence, was unmeritorious, frivolous, and vexatious”. The ruling was delivered on Thursday at the Demerara High Court.
Goolsarran was one of two nominees that the National Assembly had settled on for appointment to the PSC since he had been nominated by the Guyana Public Service Senior Staff Association (GPSSSA). The GPSU argued that the GPSSSA is not a certified trade union recognised by the Trade Union Recognition Act for the purpose of representing public officers for the appointment to the PSC, and hence could not properly nominate Goolsarran for appointment to the PSC in accordance with Article 200 (1)(b) of the Constitution of Guyana.
Article 200 (1) of the Constitution dictates that the PSC shall consist of six members who shall be appointed as follows: (a) three members appointed by the President acting after meaningful consultation with the Leader of the Opposition; (b) two members appointed by the President upon nomination by the National Assembly after it has consulted such bodies as appear to it to represent public officers or classes of public officers; and (c) if the President thinks fit, one other member appointed by the President acting in accordance with his own deliberate judgement.
In reply to the GPSU’s case, Attorney General Anil Nandlall, SC, argued that the framers of the Constitution deliberately and intentionally used the term “such bodies as may appear” in order to lend to the widest possible interpretation. Considering this, he said that any attempt to narrow this clear intention would violate or fetter the supremacy of the Constitution.
“Accordingly, an attempt to use the Trade Union Recognition Act to constrict the language of the Constitution is without any basis and would be an obvious unconstitutional exercise. The framers of the Constitution also applied and used the term ‘trade union’ in various other provisions, but deliberately chose to use the word ‘bodies’ in Article 200 (1) of the Constitution,” he argued.
The Attorney General also highlighted that the framers of the Constitution are familiar with the manner in which public officers can be represented and that this is seen in the widely recognised fundamental right of the freedom of association.
He said the right to associate freely is further reinforced in Article 200 (1) by the recognition of any “body”, be it an association, a non-government organisation, or a trade union, of public officers or classes of public officers. He, therefore, said there is no requirement, under Article 200 (1) for the GPSSSA to be registered anywhere in pursuance of their exercise of the freedom of association. Additionally, the Attorney General emphasised the concept of parliamentary privilege, which is grounded in the common law, subject only to the supremacy of the Constitution. Essentially, it was argued that as long as the National Assembly acted intra vires the Constitution, the court has no reason, and or ought not, to meddle in its internal affairs.
According to Nandlall, Article 200 (1) of the Constitution vests the power to determine the bodies to be consulted, solely with the National Assembly.
Accordingly, he added, the National Assembly by Resolution 24 of 2003, decided that the GPSSSA would be among the bodies to be consulted pursuant to Article 200 (1).
He was keen to point out that for the past 20 years, the GPSSSA has been invited to submit nominees to the PSC, which it has accordingly done, and its nominees have correspondingly been accepted, adopted by the outer Assembly, and thereafter appointed to the PSC. As such, he argued that the GPSU, is now, after 20 years, estopped from now instituting a claim.
After hearing oral arguments from the attorneys-at-law for all the parties, the Chief Justice found that the GPSU’s case contained not a “scintilla of evidence, was unmeritorious, frivolous and vexatious”, said the Attorney General Chambers in a statement on Friday.
In dismissing the application, the Chief Justice awarded costs in the sum of $750,000 to each of the respondents, the Attorney General, and the Speaker of the National Assembly.
During his weekly programme—Issues in the News—the Attorney General had said, “After 20 years, the GPSU suddenly awakes from a slumber and begins now to challenge, legally, the qualification of this body to send a nominee,” calling the legal challenge “a disguised attempt to sabotage constitutional democracy, and to sabotage the work of the Government.”
Earlier this month, President Dr Irfaan Ali swore in six members of the PSC.
In addition to Goolsarran, the other members are Manniram Prashad, Maurice Gajadhar, Melcita Bovell, Chandrawati Ramson, and Janice Bowen.
These members have been appointed to serve for three years.
The PSC is a constitutional body responsible for overseeing the Public Service in Guyana.
It is in charge of appointing, promoting, and disciplining public service officials and fashioning rules and regulations to govern the activities of public servants in office. (G1)