Dear Editor,
On 25th/26th November, 2000, there was staged with C A Nigel Hughes, Attorney-at-Law as its chief-engineer, a Guyana Bar Association Law Conference which I still rate as the healthiest occasion involving the Guyana Bar that I have experienced since my association with the legal arena in October, 1949. That conference attracted the active participation of the judiciary, senior counsel, magistracy and the general Bar − more than 100 souls, who were treated to several written presentations and oral discussion of the most encouraging quality.
As an invited presenter of some aspects of title to land, I embarked upon my admittedly humble presentation with the words to the following effect. Ever since creation man has devoted a tremendous amount of his energies toward its acquisition for one purpose or another, in the course of which he has demonstrated an alarming capacity to shed and to sacrifice precious human blood. It is this latter element that tends to stamp land-holding, and by that same token the law governing it, with a degree of sacredness to which we must ever pay regard. Title to land is indeed all about security, whether from a national, commercial corporate or individual perspective. The territorial rights under international law accruing to a great nation occupying three million square miles and supported by unlimited military might are in a sense of no greater import than those claimed and jealously guarded by the squatter in relation to his 40′ x 80′ tenement.
It is in such a serious light that I regard the obligations of a government both to organize and sustain accurate and reliable records of titles to each and every portion of land within its borders. The requisites of property administration, social order, personal and domestic security, commercial and financial compulsions impose together that continuing obligation of the maintenance of the land-title record.
Now when I indicated two weeks ago my intention to address the matter of the administration of the Land Registry, I did not remember that I had already done so through these very letter pages, mainly SN (circa 25th May, 2010) 14th July, 2010 and 25th November, 2010. However, since there are so many other problems to contend with, it may be appropriate that I attempt a brief summary for the benefit of those unfamiliar with this most essential aspect of public life.
Until the year 1960 we had all been, and still are, wedded to a land-title system familiarly known as the ‘Transports’ or Roman-Dutch system involving advertisement of transactions in the Official Gazette. Although some of its administrative woes featured in my letter of two weeks ago, this system of transports, mortgages and leases will remain with us for the foreseeable future and so merits continuing attention and support.
In order to address some of the shortcomings of that system and to achieve a measure of simplicity in land tenure, there was introduced in 1959 by the Land Registry Ordinance 1959 (now Act), the Torrens system of Land Registration which would first address those well-populated areas mainly on the sea coast and designated ‘registration areas’ under the Act, situated mainly between Charity and Corriverton and in those riverain communities where the land had been held by transport. There would be appointed Commissioners of Title who would hear applications by the public for title to the land they occupied on the basis of some old transport, inheritance by intestacy or will, undisturbed occupation or purchase.
The Commissioners’ awards or de- clarations of title would initiate entries into the land registers on which basis Certificates of Title would be issued to the successful applicants.
The appealing features of this new system were in the main:-
simplicity of description of the individual land holding eg Parcel number, in Block number in Zone (geographical area); all such titles now being based on accurate land surveys.
- Simple statutory forms for transfers, mortgages, charges and leases
- No advertisement in the Gazette; registration of transactions should take just one or two days.
- Provision for registration of judgments; liens and loans obtained by delivery of the Certificate of Title to a lender; caveats restraining further transactions on the land without informing the caveator.
- An assurance fund for compensation to persons suffering loss of title through error.
The Principal Land Registry at Georgetown had shared the premises with the Deeds Registry until some time in the year 2003 when it was decided that it be removed to the premises of the Guyana Lands & Surveys Commission.
At the date of the purported appointment of the present Registrar Miss Juliet Sattaur, in April, 2004 ministerial responsibility for the Land Registry resided in the Minister of Legal Affairs. However, in the revision by the President of such ministeria1 responsibility in November, 2006 there was a patent change or omission whereby charge of the Land Registry did not feature in the responsibilities of any minister. The constitutional result was that those responsibilities remained, as they still do, with the President of the Republic. I can only opine, that this anomaly was never drawn to the attention of the President, a man absorbed with the understandably broad spectrum of national and international responsibilities. The result, was and still remains, that the Land Registry is the only government department not headed by an appointed minister who would be charged with ensuring its effectiveness, overseeing its operations, sponsoring its development towards serving the purpose of its establishment and answering to Cabinet. Well, in effect, there is no such appointed minister and it could hardly be expected that the Head of State actually perform those duties.
This may, however, have been no accident, because the operations of the Land Registry were virtually hijacked by President Jagdeo for the narrow and politically selfish purpose of giving preferential treatment to the issue of Certificates of Title to allottees of land in government housing schemes. This policy has wrought havoc upon the timely processing of public transactions like transfers of title and mortgages. Lawyers continue to complain that too many such matters are unfairly delayed in deference to the preferential treatment accorded to government housing scheme titles.
Complaints by the public over the many problems at the Land Registry attributable to the idiosyncratic behaviour of the Registrar continued to be ignored by the Office of the President. As reported in Stabroek News of 9th August, 2010 Dr Luncheon stated that “Government was preparing detailed response on Land Registry complaints.” Two-and-a-half years have elapsed. The promised response remains a promise. The department flounders on with government apparently content to rely upon the supposed immortality of its one Registrar – no deputy no assistant.
This, therefore, is the present structural scenario of the Land Registry:-
- One Registrar
- No Deputy Registrar, no Assistant Registrar; the Act provides for these;
- At the Principal Land Registry, Georgetown, only three clerks attending to the public, who, though very diligent, lack that depth of training in the reading and interpretation of the Act.
- An insultingly small public area only five feet wide by twelve feet in length with a substantial iron grill and a harmless aged security guard protecting those officers from us the public and with no space on the counter to rest a document, examine a land register or plan or even sign a cheque or document. (This must be experienced to be believed – a visit is imperative.)
- At New Amsterdam, Berbice two junior clerks – inadequate in every regard.
- At the Essequibo end there is no Registry office but it is understood that on Thursdays the Registrar accompanied by one of the clerks from Georgetown visits some site in Parika (a geographically sensible location) to minister to the public there.
- Notably under the existing conditions the Registrar is the only officer legally qualified to sign Certificates of Title or any other certificate relating to the business of the Registry, since there is no Deputy Registrar or Assistant Registrar in existence. What happens when the Registrar is away from the Principal Registry for any reason, is of a matter of conjecture.
Now, surely this scandalous state of affairs could only persist with the blessing of the governmental administration. What I find entirely amazing is that the government which has demonstrated such zeal and imagination and committed so great a degree of human resources and finance toward an expanded housing programme can be so careless about ensuring the integrity of both the Transports and Land Registry systems that would guarantee the
production and reliability of the land titles upon which any such programme must be founded. Arising from very healthy correspondence with Dr Luncheon in the year 2001, I was convinced and satisfied that he favoured the Land Registration system as the “simpler, less expensive and most appropriate vehicle” for delivering title to the thousands of allottees in new government housing schemes.
I have observed that the new privately owned and developed areas east of Eccles, Republic Park, Continental Park and further south are to be titled under the Land Registry Act. Does this not excite some spirit of urgency regarding the staffing of the Land Registry?
And so the present status may be summarized thus:
- One Registrar, no Deputy, no Assistant.
- A junior-staffed office at New Amsterdam – new recruits
- No office in Essequibo
- A Registrar unsupervised by a Minister, no legal counsel to whom lawyers may address arguments on issues raised by the Registrar
- Extremely long delays in processing of transactions filed
- Grossly inadequate public office space for proper transaction of business
All of the above take place with the implied compliments of the following
Persons:
- The President in his capacity as Minister under the Act or the Head of the Presidential Secretariat.
- The parliamentary opposition who have apparently concluded that they will never win primary responsibility for these matters:
- The Bankers Association and their lawyers.
- The Guyana Bar Associations, general and female.
- The Private Section Commission and Chambers of Commerce.
May they all rest in peace.
Yours faithfully,
Leon O Rockcliffe
