Govt. moves to Appeal Court for stay of CJ’s judgments in no-confidence motion cases

Feb 12, 2019 News

The government, through Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Basil Williams has moved to the Court of Appeal—where it is seeking an interim stay of the judgments and orders made by Chief Justice (CJ) Roxane George Wiltshire—in relation to cases arising from the December 21, 2018 passage of the No-Confidence Motion in the National Assembly.

Attorney General Basil Williams

The government is further asking for a Conservatory Order, preserving the previously existing state of affairs that the President, Cabinet and all Ministers of the Government remain in office until the hearing and determination of the appeal filed in regards to the judgments which were handed down on January 31, at the High Court in Georgetown.
In the court filings Dr. Barton Scotland, Speaker of the National Assembly of Guyana; Bharrat Jagdeo, Leader of the Opposition and Christopher Ram, Attorney-at-Law have been listed as Respondents.
In a Notice of Appeal filed last week, the government said that the CJ erred and misdirected herself in law when she ruled that the National Assembly of Guyana properly, validly and lawfully passed a motion on a vote of confidence provided for by Article 106 (6) of the Constitution by 33 votes and that Government was defeated.
The Attorney General further contends that the CJ erred and misdirected herself in law when she ruled that the passage of the motion of no confidence provided for by Article 106 (6) of the Constitution by the National Assembly on 21st December, 2018 requires immediate resignation of the President and Cabinet.
“The Honourable Chief Justice Roxane George Wiltshire erred in law and fact and her decision was unreasonable and cannot be supported having regard to the evidence,” Williams maintains.
The government has filed a summons with the Court of Appeal supported by an affidavit sworn to by State Counsel Raeanna Clarke, in which it is requesting the Stay and Conservatory Order. The Court of Appeal is yet to fix a date for hearing.
According to Clarke, “I am advised by my Attorneys-at-Law and verily believe that the Conservatory order is necessary to preserve the status quo ante as the period for the hearing and determination of the matter may expire before that time prescribed in Article 106 (7) of the Constitution which requires that the President and Government remain in office and hold elections within three (3) months.”
Clarke said, “That I will contend that the appeal has good prospects of success and the Honourable Court ought to grant a stay and a conservatory order in order to ensure that if the appeal is successful it is not rendered nugatory.”
Clarke, in the affidavit, said that the Court of Appeal has held that it has jurisdiction to grant a stay of execution of a declaratory judgment in matters that would affect the public interest.