Georgetown : The Attorney General (AG), Anil Nandlall has indicated that the case filed by Opposition Leader, David Granger against Finance Minister, Dr. Ashni Singh is unlikely to be concluded by December 31, 2014. This was reported by Head of the Presidential
The case being handled by the AG, brought by Granger is against the spending by the Finance Minister under constitutional coverage. The action was brought by Granger against Dr. Singh and the Speaker of the National Assembly, Raphael Trotman.
“It does seem from the AG’s presentation, the efforts by the Leader of the Opposition to prevent the Minister of Finance from spending amounts of money under constitutional coverage, is going to be the subject of legal arguments that are not expected to begin earlier than the 29th of December 2014. The expectation is those legal arguments are unlikely to be concluded by the 31st of December, 2014; the date at which the expenditure that is being queried, is being sought to be stayed by the Leader of the Opposition, ends anyhow,” Dr. Luncheon stated.
Dr. Luncheon noted that the action by the Finance Minister is through the Chief Justice’s earlier ruling and perfectly legitimate.
“There is some lack of understanding in what lays behind this resort,” the HPS stated adding that the Chief Justice in his earlier ruling dealt with the matter conclusively, “Yet Granger thought it necessary and convenient to apply to the Constitutional Court, a legal action against the Minister and the Speaker of the National Assembly. To our understanding being aware of the Chief Justice’s ruling, such a resort begs the questions why,” he added.
The second matter, the HPS pointed out is the appeal for a stay in execution of the Chief Justice’s ruling in the matter of the petition by an attorney, in support of a client under the Sexual Offences Act. “The AG disclosed at Cabinet that the efforts of the state had prevailed and a stay of execution of the Chief Justice’s ruling which essentially had said paper committals were unconstitutional has been granted.” This has allowed for paper committals to be concluded and those that had been concluded, but were in abeyance, moved forward.
The HPS emphasised that the two matters remain of concern to the administration and of necessity to Guyanese in general.
