‘Illegal’ $4.5B spending by Gov’t…Pointless pursuing criminal proceedings against Finance Minister now-Basil Williams

Feb 28, 2015 News

– “It is obvious that DPP would intervene,”

By Kiana Wilburg
Shadow Minister of Legal Affairs for A Partnership for National Unity (APNU), Basil Williams expressed

APNU’s Shadow Minister of Legal Affairs, Basil Williams

yesterday, that while the court ruled that government’s spending of billions of taxpayers’ monies which were disapproved by the National Assembly was unconstitutional, it would more than likely be futile trying to pursue criminal proceedings against the defaulters at this point.
At the Partnership’s press conference which was held at the Hadfield Street Office of the Leader of the Opposition, Williams responded to several questions posed by Kaieteur News on the said matter and essentially, what is the next step forward for the APNU considering the court ruling.
Chief Justice (Ag) Ian Chang in a 36-page ruling unambiguously stated that it was illegal for the Minister of Finance, Dr. Ashni Singh to spend almost $4.5B despite the explicit disapproval of the National Assembly.
This publication then asked Williams, the APNU’s Attorney on the matter, to explain the way forward in holding accountable, those responsible and to recovering the said sums.
The lawyer admitted that indeed, action could be taken against the Finance Minister. He added, “You couldn’t breach the Constitution by spending the people’s monies and not be subject to a charge, and we at all times before the Chief Justice said, that the possible charge is misfeasance in public office.”
He emphasized that APNU does have a plan but “we don’t control the relevant state apparatus to deal with that and I think even Sir Fenton Ramsahoye S.C spoke to that. The question of enforcing would be in the hands or domain of the government, because as you know, all criminal prosecutions are under the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).”

Finance Minister,
Dr. Ashni Singh

The Parliamentarian reminded that the Leader of the Alliance For Change, Khemraj Ramjattan, had filed a complaint with the Guyana Police Force against Dr. Singh, over what was deemed at the time, the “alleged illegal spending” of some $4.5B from the National Treasury. But that matter, however, died a natural death.
“You saw what happened with that (Ramjattan’s case) and if you file a private criminal matter, the DPP would intervene. It is obvious. The conclusion is that we have to win the elections.”
He said that it is not that APNU is unable to take action. In fact, Williams stressed that the partnership does have options at its disposal.
The politician said however, that it is a question of the DPP acting on the matter.
He reminded that “Shalimar Ali-Hack has indicated, that she was not interested in Ramjattan’s matter and so we will have to look at our options, whatever options inside the Parliament when it resumes.”
He said, too, that certainly their new government will ensure that justice is served.
Though he was optimistic about possible options available to APNU in a new Parliament to hold the defaulters accountable, the lawyer was reminded that such matters in the Tenth Parliament could not be raised in the Eleventh Parliament. This was confirmed by Speaker Raphael Trotman and Clerk of the National Assembly, Sherlock Isaacs. Williams was then asked, given this basis, what options could he possibly be examining in a new Parliament.
He said, “I don’t know you could thief the state’s monies and you could say is not during this parliament is during another … it is the criminal law …so you guilty which ever Parliament is there, that doesn’t change.”
When faced with the question as to whether the APNU-AFC coalition once it assumes office will ensure that legal proceedings are filed, Williams said that he cannot say that definitively, for he is neither the “Attorney General nor the DPP.”
He noted nonetheless that he would like to see taxpayers have redress against errant Ministers who access the Treasury unlawfully.
The lawyer then sought to make a few clarifications about the Conservatory order which saw Opposition Leader, David Granger as the plaintiff in the case.
Though Chang had ruled that the government acted unlawfully, he declined to grant the Conservatory Order. The order sought to prevent the government from spending more monies which did not receive Parliamentary approval. The acting CJ had said that the order was “misconceived and must be dismissed.”
He advised that a conservatory order must now (in 2015) relate strictly to future constitutional or statutory spending excess and not past excesses.
The Chief Justice had said too, that if the order was granted, it would in effect, be an injunction against Government spending permitted by the Constitution, and the Financial Management and Accountability Act, rather than a conservatory order against non-approved spending for the past financial year, one he noted as “a classic case of the grant of an injunction as a conservatory order.”
Chang said that for those reasons, the application for an interlocutory conservatory order cannot be granted.
However, Williams explained that the court action was filed to prevent the government from spending funds that were disapproved by the Parliament. He stressed that APNU never went to court for anything to do with 2015 spending.
He said, too, that there was no basis for the Chief Justice to rule or say that he was not granting the Conservatory Order because he could not restrain government from spending in 2015. “We never asked him for that. If they (government) go on a path like that before we can go to court again,” the Shadow Minister reiterated.
APNU’s Shadow Finance Minister, Carl Greenidge had emphasized, however, that the penalties for the deliberate misuse of state funds are articulated in the law, specifically in the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act (FMAA).
The Shadow Finance Minister said therefore, once the CJ made it clear that the law was broken, it is now a simple matter for Dr. Singh to be prosecuted along with other offenders who acted in accordance with his decision, such as Permanent Secretaries, among other accounting officials in several agencies.