AG moves to have case against Parliamentary Secretaries dismissed

Mar 14, 2021 News

Parliamentary Secretaries Sarah Browne and Vikash Ramkissoon.

Kaieteur News – Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall, S.C has requested that the court dismiss the case filed against the appointment of the two Parliamentary Secretaries on the grounds that the applicant, APNU/AFC Parliamentarian, Christopher Jones failed to show the court in what way their appointment is unconstitutional.
Last December, Jones approached the High Court seeking a declaration to have Parliamentary Secretaries, Sarah Browne and Vikash Ramkissoon removed from the National Assembly.
In his Fixed Date Application (FDA), Jones claims that the two were appointed illegally.
In his written response to the Court, the Attorney General described Jones’ application as misconceived in law.
According to the AG, Article 113(2) of the Constitution gives a clear and unambiguous directive of what is to govern the qualifications and appointment of Parliamentary Secretaries.
He stressed that the “Qualifications for appointment to the office of Parliamentary Secretary and other matters connected therewith are to be regulated by Article 186 of the Constitution.”
“The temptation to argue that the appointment of Parliamentary Secretaries is governed by Article 103 (3) of the Constitution of Guyana must be vigorously resisted. Article 103 (3) states: Not more than four Ministers and two Parliamentary secretaries shall be appointed by the President from among persons who are qualified to be elected as members of the National Assembly,” Nandlall said.
He continued that even though, Article 103(3) speaks of the President’s appointment of Four Ministers and two Parliamentary Secretaries; Article 103(3) is a general article speaking to appointment of Minister… it does not substantively govern the appointment of Parliamentary Secretaries which is substantively governed by the Article 113(2) and Article 186.
He contends therefore that inclusion of the words ‘Parliamentary Secretaries’ in body of that provision (Article 103(3) was merely superfluous.
The applicant seems to have misconstrued Article 103(3) of the Constitution in that they are conflating the requirements for the appointment of Ministers and equating those requirements for the appointment of Parliamentary Secretaries.
“A reading of the Constitution as a whole reveals that other references to Article 103 of the Constitution are only in relation to Ministerial appointments, not the appointment of Parliamentary Secretaries. This bolsters the argument that this provision was only intended to apply to the appointment of Minister,” he continued.
Further, Nandlall submits that an examination of the history of the appointment of Parliamentary Secretaries reveal that from the time of the Guyana ‘s first Constitution in 1966, it has always been the intention of Parliament that elected members of the National Assembly be eligible for appointment as Parliamentary Secretaries.
“In fact,” he said, “Up until the 1980 constitution, there was the only category of persons who could be appointed as Parliamentary Secretaries.”
The AG therefore submitted that the essence of Article 113 and Article 186 is to safeguard the entitlement of elected members to be appointed as Parliamentary Secretaries. The AG noted too that at the time of their appointments, the two parliamentary secretaries were elected members of the National Assembly.
He emphasized that in reading the constitution as a whole, it would be incongruous to say that Article 103(3) which references ‘Ministers’ would strictly apply also to Parliamentary Secretaries. “It would in effect render Articles 113 and 186 obsolete or otiose,” Nandlall added.
In his view that the applicant appears to be arguing an absurdity to the effect that by appointing Parliamentary Secretaries, two elected members of the National Assembly is to expand the number of seats beyond the 65.
“It is therefore submitted that the Court should not be derailed by Article 103(3) in determining this issue as this provision was clearly intended to apply only to the appointment of Ministers by the President,” Nandlall said in his submissions.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News