AG presents arguments over issue of jurisdiction in Red House court case

Feb 22, 2017 News

---

Attorney-at-Law Anil Nandlall is set to respond to arguments presented by Attorney General Basil Williams on matters relating to the Red House.

Williams presented legal arguments in relation to the national heritage site, when the matter came up for hearing before Chief Justice (Ag) Yonette Cummings-Edwards on Monday.
In his preliminary arguments, the Attorney General, (AG) submitted that the Court’s first duty is to determine whether it had jurisdiction to proceed to hear the matter.
The Attorney General contended that the Chief Justice had no Jurisdiction to proceed with the matter for a number of reasons.
One of the reasons the AG contended is that an applicant for the Cheddi Jagan Research Centre Inc. (CJRCI), who goes ex parte to the Court, has a duty to be candid with the Court and make full and frank disclosures of material facts within his knowledge.
Failure to do so entitles the Court to discharge any order made and refuse to deal with the merits of the matter.
The Attorney General therefore submitted that the Applicant, the Cheddi Jagan Research Centre Inc. (CJRCI) failed to make  full and frank disclosures of material facts  in its Ex Parte Application by way  of Affidavit  for Conservatory Orders when it concealed from the Court that President Ramotar sanctioned/approved the lease in 2012; that the lease being 99 years was not executed in the manner of a transport before the Court e.g was not published in the official Gazette; the lease was not filed as record in the Registry and annotated and Red House was a National Monument under the National Trust Act Chapter 20:03.
Williams submitted that the omission to execute the contract in the manner of a transport before the Court and file it as of record in the Registry was fatal since under the Deeds Registry Act Chapter 5:01 such a lease was invalid, ineffectual and could not be pleaded in a Court of Law.

As such he surmised that the Chief Justice as a result had no Jurisdiction to proceed to hear the application that is founded on such a lease.
Attorney Nandlall is set to respond to these submissions when the matter continues on March 2.
Nandlall, nonetheless spoke to media operatives following the in Chamber proceeding. He described the points made by the AG at this stage of the trial as “deeply flawed” and “premature.”
He said that while the AG was intended to address the Court on matters of jurisdiction, his arguments were based on whether or not the case has merit.
Additionally, Nandlall expressed concerns over the language of the AG with regards to the President.
During the course of the case, Nandlall noted that the AG continually used the name of the President, saying he (the President) is anxiously awaiting the determination of the matter.
The lawyer believes that such use of the President’s name is improper and is viewed as a manner of putting pressure on the Judge. He noted too that the President is not listed a respondent in the matter.
Additionally, Nandlall pointed to the fact that the AG has not file the initial affidavit in response to the action.
“To date, he has failed to file the Affidavit in Answer which he was ordered to do within 21 days since the December 30, last.”
Red House has been the subject of a court matter since December 2015.
The PPP/C had moved to the High Court to bar the revocation of a lease and the removal of artifacts from Red House, a national heritage site.
The move came after President David Granger ordered that the lease to the Cheddi Jagan Research Centre Incorporated (CJRCI) be revoked and that the occupants vacate the property by December 31, 2016.
The Red House lease was granted by the then PPP/C government to Cheddi Jagan Research Centre Incorporated (CJRCI), a company formed by the members of the same party.
However according to information obtained by the current government, on March 30, 2012 the Red House lease agreement was initiated without the approval of either the President of the day or The National Trust of Guyana, in contravention of Section 10 of the Lands Department Act Chapter 59:01.
A subsequent affidavit was filed in the High Court by former President Donald Ramotar to support the motion filed by the PPP/C opposition seeking to bar the revocation of a lease to the Red House.
According to a sworn document, Ramotar said that at all material times, he was aware and authorized and sanctioned the issuance of a lease of the Government land for educational /research purposes on the March 30, 2012 in respect to areas ‘A’ now called Red House comprising of Lots 65, 66 and 67 High Street, Kingston, acting on behalf of the Government of Guyana and the Cheddi Jagan Research Institute.
In the affidavit dated January 30, 2017, Ramotar had explained that as President of Guyana, he exercised all powers conferred upon himself by the Constitution and Laws of Guyana in leasing the property.

---

---