Latest update March 20th, 2025 5:10 AM
Latest News
- Guyana’s oil growth boosting regional economies– CDB Director of Economics
- Suspected outbreak of Hand, Foot and Mouth Disease in Region Four
- Israel launches first ground offensive since Gaza ceasefire collapse
- Sod turned for $665M expansion of St. Stanislaus College
- Pensioner jailed for raping child
Court rules NRF Bill was legally passed
Kaieteur News – High Court judge, Justice Navindra Singh, on Monday dismissed the Opposition’s challenge to the legality of the passage of the Natural Resources Fund (NRF) Bill.
The challenge to the legality of the Bill was initiated by A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) Opposition Chief Whip, Christopher Jones, and Trade Unionist, Norris Witter.
The duo contended that NRF Bill was not legally passed in the National Assembly on December 29, 2021. Kaieteur News had reported that among other things, Jones and Witter claimed that due to the absence of the ‘Parliamentary Mace’ – the most significant symbol in the National Assembly, and some members not seated, the Legislation cannot be regarded as being lawfully passed.
Attorney General (AG) Anil Nandlall, SC
However, Justice Singh dismissed the case and stated that the absence of the mace during the passage of the NRF bill did not invalidate its subsequent passage. He emphasised that the presence of the mace in the National Assembly is not mandated by the Constitution or the laws of Guyana. Therefore, the bill’s passage was not deemed unconstitutional or unlawful because of its absence.
On December 29, 2021, during the 34th sitting of the National Assembly during the reading of the Natural Resource Fund Bill, Opposition Members of Parliament had forcefully took possession of the Mace, removed it from the Parliamentary Chambers and caused damage to it.
The proceedings continued with a “replacement” Mace.
On the issue of whether the absence of the Mace in the National Assembly during the passage of legislation invalidates the passage of such legislation; Justice Singh in his written ruling said that the mace in the National Assembly is not mandated by the Constitution or the Laws of Guyana and therefore its absence cannot result in the passage of the Bill being unconstitutional or unlawful.
The judge said that it is clear from the evidence that the Mace is nothing more than a relic intended only to be symbolic existence in the National Assembly.
“It is illogical to believe that the presence or absence of a length of metal can determine the legitimacy of acts done by persons elected by the citizens of the country pursuant to their elected duties. Further, it is preposterous to contend that the legislative power of the nation can be halted by the abhorrent and deplorable actions of a few miscreants,” Justice Singh said.
Following the ruling, Opposition lawyer Roysdale Forde, SC expressed his dissatisfaction with the ruling and signaled his intention to appeal the ruling.
Opposition Chief Whip, Christopher Jones
The NRF Bill which has since become law is meant to ensure that there is security, transparency and accountability surrounding revenues the country gains from oil and gas. It also outlines a structure of how the monies from oil and gas will be used and provide for continuous public disclosures, audits and parliamentary approvals.
However, Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Mohabir Anil Nandlall, SC, in said, “Mace or absence of mace has nothing to do with the legislative power of the parliament to make laws…Parliament is driven by the elected officials who are there elected by the people and is governed by the constitution. The constitution nor the standing order makes any reference for mace.”
He welcomed the court’s decision, highlighting the importance of these rulings for the development of the law and jurisprudence of the nation.
The Attorney General had expressed confidence that the court would hand down a favourable ruling. He had even told reporters, “This case should not have been filed in the first place…”
The trial into the case had wrapped up last December with the testimony from the Department of Public Information’s (DPI) Videography Manager, Kennyann Bacchus, on what transpired on the day in question.
Jones and Witter brought the case against the Attorney General, Parliament Office, Speaker of the National Assembly, Clerk of the National Assembly and the Minister of Fiance.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
No immigrant should feel safe in America today
Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- There was a time when an illegal immigrant in America could live in the shadows with some... more
If Guyana’s President Ali is the “Zelensky of the Caribbean”, who is the Putin?
Antigua and Barbuda’s Ambassador to the US and the OAS, Ronald Sanders By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- In the latest... more
Weekend Cartoon
