The Regional Law Revision Centre (RLRC) says that it was never involved in the production of the Revised Laws of Guyana, which has been criticised over key omissions and errors.
In a press release in light of recent statements alluding to it, the organisation stated that the RLRC was not involved in any capacity with the production of the revised laws.
The statement acknowledged that in October 2012, a staff member from Guyana’s Law Revision Commission was sent to attend a two-day training workshop on Consolidation of Laws at the RLRC. Subsequently, it added, it took the opportunity to contact Guyana to engage in discussions to provide a quotation for consolidation and revision services but it was informed that the country’s revision project was already completed.
“The RLRC clarifies the statements made, which on one reading, might imply that the RLRC was not involved or liaised with Guyana on their law revision project, which led to the publication of the Revised Laws of Guyana,” the release said.
Attorney General Anil Nandlall has stated that since the country’s Law Revision Commission was established under the Inter-American Development Bank Modernisation of Justice Administration Project, members were sent for training at the RLRC. Nandlall had told Stabroek News that the commission had utilised the training aspects of the RLRC but had never stated that the RLRC was ever involved in the production of the revised laws.
Nandlall maintained that process was long, tedious and expensive. He had stated that “law revision is a work in progress and… part of that complement of the IDB- funded project was to specifically establish the commission as well as training of the technical staff.”
Attorney Christopher Ram, in a subsequent letter to the Stabroek News on September 19, stated that Nandlall’s statements on the RLRC were “a crude attempt to attribute blame for his commission’s incompetence to a small regional block of three countries – Anguilla, Montserrat and the Turks and Caicos Islands – all of which can probably sit comfortably on one of our Essequibo islands, and none of which is an independent state.”
Ram had been highly critical of the revision process, including the omission of subsidiary legislation. Ram said that the revised laws not only omitted items that would enable all users, including judges, magistrates and court officials, legal practitioners and the public to have a complete picture of the current laws of the country, but also failed to document some important legislation.
