Latest update January 13th, 2025 3:10 AM
Latest News
- Oil deal requires Govt. to formally write Exxon to request renegotiation – Dr. Adams
- Govt. eyeing another US$1.5B loan from US EXIM Bank
- Israeli siege of north Gaza leaves 5,000 dead, missing after 100 days
- More traffic cops using bodycams after Hicken’s warning
- Second terminal for CJIA on govt’s 2025 agenda
AG wants $3M in court costs after APNU+AFC loses challenge over Hicken’s appointment
Kaieteur News – Attorney General (AG) and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall, SC, has requested court costs to the tune of $3 million following the A Partnership for National Unity +Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) loss in the bid to legally challenge the President’s appointment of Clifton Hicken as Commissioner of Police.
Attorney General, Anil Nandlall, SC
The AG outlined his request in a letter circulated on Friday hours after Chief Justice (ag) Roxane George-Wiltshire tossed out the APNU+AFC’s challenge.
Nandlall, said the sum is mainly for legal fees and other costs incurred by the Attorney General’s Chambers and other respondents in the matter brought by Forde, who is also a member of the APNU+AFC.
He also detailed in the letter that Forde has seven days to respond before the respondents in the case make their formal application to the court. The request comes even as Nandlall raises concerns over the heavy financial burden that is placed on his office to fend off the numerous lawsuits filed against the State.
On Thursday, the Chief Justice (CJ) upheld President Irfaan Ali’s decision to appoint Assistant Commissioner of Police Clifton Hicken to act as the country’s Commissioner of Police.
Attorney, Roysdale Forde, SC
In May, APNU+AFC Chief Whip, Christopher Jones had asked the High Court to nullify Hicken’s March 30 appointment, arguing that the President violated the Constitution when he failed to “meaningfully consult” with the Opposition Leader.
Jones had moved to the High Court in a bid to have the appointment of Hicken overturned.
The APNU+AFC Chief Whip had asked that the Court grants, among other reprieves, a declaration that Hicken’s appointment as the acting Commissioner of Police is unreasonable, ultra vires of the Constitution, Common Law and is illegal, null, void and of no legal effect.
But in her decision, the CJ determined that while in usual circumstances, as per Article 211 (2) of Guyana’s Constitution, the President is required to meaningfully consult with the Opposition Leader and the Police Service Commission before appointing a Commissioner of Police, in the case of Hicken’s appointment, there was a necessity to act. “In this sense, there was a necessity to act,” the CJ ruled.
She added, “This is a case of a necessity to ensure that the unexpected lacuna did not result in a situation that would have left the Guyana Police Force without a Commissioner…It could not be that the President should have been rendered incapable of discharging his functions to appoint a Commissioner of Police.”
The Chief Justice noted too that the parties challenging Hicken’s appointment agreed with the need to appoint someone to the post given that they suggested that the vacancy could have been filled by the previous person performing the functions of Top Cop, Nigel Hoppie or someone they deemed as more suitably qualified for the post, Deputy Commissioner, Paul Williams.
Further, the Chief Justice said the appointment was well within the ambit of the Constitution of Guyana. “It cannot be declared that the appointment violates the Constitution…nor can it be declared that there was no consultation between the President and the Opposition Leader, as there was no opposition leader in place at the time for an extended period.
The judge noted that the office of the Opposition Leader became vacant on January 26 after the resignation of Joseph Harmon, and was only filled when Aubrey Norton was appointed on April 14. She stressed that it was the responsibility of the President as Head of State to ensure that the law enforcement arm was in order, by having the requisite vacancies filled
“There could be no disregard of and thereby a breach of the requirement for meaningful consultation when it was impossible to so engage. The applicant [Jones] therefore is relying on an impossibility to ground the claim of unconstitutionality,” held Justice George.
Jones and team have since indicated that they will be moving to appeal the decision of the court.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
Social media reporting is a double-edged sword
Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- Social media has undoubtedly changed how we share and receive information. It has made... more
Clarifying misconceptions about the Panama Canal
Sir Ronald Sanders (Antigua and Barbuda’s Ambassador to the US and the OAS) By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News–... more
Weekend Cartoon
