Opposition leader David Granger yesterday denied the claim that he had ruled out the appointment of either the acting Chief Justice Ian Chang or acting Chancellor Carl Singh, while saying that he only asked for a transparent process to be used to fill the posts.
In response to a statement by Attorney General Anil Nandlall that he rejected the appointment of both men without reason, Granger told an APNU press conference that he met with President Donald Ramotar on March 6 and they discussed advertising the posts throughout the Caribbean to countries which share Guyana’s legal framework.
Granger said that if either Justice Singh or Justice Chang applied for the post and were reviewed by a panel then he would not object. “I proposed in order to break the deadlock a series of measures which I asked the president to consider,” he explained, while noting that after two months nothing has been done and no further dialogue was had on the subject until Nandlall claimed he was against the appointments.
“Mr Nandlall issued a blatant lie… he was not present at the meeting,” Granger said. “I would like to assure the people of Guyana that the Chancellor of the Judiciary, whoever it may be, is appointed through transparent process” he added.
Granger noted that since April 2005, the ruling PPP/C and then President Bharrat Jagdeo and Leader of the Opposition Robert Corbin could not agree and the issue has been deadlocked. He added that during his discussion with the President, no names were discussed. “We were not opposed to any particular name. In fact, we did not discuss the names. What we discussed was the modality or the methodology that would be used to select the next Chancellor of [the] Judiciary,” he said.
Granger further said that he does not propose to remove either Justice Chang or Justice Singh from the positions but added that after eight years of deadlock the process needs to move forward and he has proposed a methodology to do so.
Meanwhile, APNU executive member Joseph Harmon suggested that Nandlall’s remarks were done as a deflective measure. He said that the AG was attempting to redirect the national discourse. Harmon said Nandlall was trying to avert the public glare from the government’s inability to meet the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force’s deadline with the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering of Terrorism Bill. Harmon also said that the remarks made by the AG also took attention away from the President’s non-compliance with the constitution by failing to sign the Fiscal Management and Accountability (Amendment) Bill 2012 and the Former Presidents (Benefits and Other Facilities) Bill 2012. He said that this was a deliberate attempt by the government to “divert” attention from more pressing issues.
