The setting of a date for the hearing of the appeal of the legality of the 2012 budget cuts could take a few more weeks as the senior registrar officer at the Court of Appeal, who is the sole person handling the matter, is on leave.
It has already been nine months since attorney Khemraj Ramjattan filed the appeal on behalf of his client Raphael Trotman, who is the Speaker of the National Assembly and there seems to be no certainty that the matter will be heard before the end of the year.
Ramjattan recently told Stabroek News that he spoke with senior registrar officer Shelly Frances about two months ago and she had indicated on that occasion that she was working on a date. When this newspaper called the Court of Appeal last Thursday and inquired about the status of the case, an employee said that Frances is the person dealing with the matter and advised that this newspaper call back during the first week in December, when she is expected to return. Based on what this newspaper was told, she is the only Court of Appeal staff member dealing with the budget cuts appeal.
According to Ramjattan, when he spoke to Frances, she did not suggest a possible timeframe in which the matter could be heard.
He went on to state that last December he photocopied the “preliminary records” which were used when the case was before the High Court and handed over seven copies to the Court of Appeal. He had previously said that the court documents numbered approximately 700 pages.
He said that those records are what he had in his possession and Frances had indicated that she would have to make contact with the other party – the Attorney General – to ensure that he agrees that those are the records and that no document was missing. “It is not like I would forget anything, at least not deliberately… I agree that should be done. Both sides have a right to agree on the documents,” he told Stabroek News.
According to Ramjattan, he is sure that those checks and finalisation of the records have not yet been done to pave the way for the setting of a date/s for the matter to be heard.
Back in 2012, the parliamentary opposition APNU and the AFC used their one-seat majority in the House to reduce the budgetary estimates by $21 billion. The opposition had cited a lack of transparency and accountability as explanations for the cuts to the allocations. The AG moved to the court in June 2012 asking for the cuts to be reversed and the monies restored.
In January this year, acting Chief Justice Ian Chang, in his final ruling, said that the National Assembly acted “unlawfully and unconstitutionally” by effecting cuts to the 2012 budget estimates, after finding that its power is limited to either giving or withholding approval
Justice Chang held that while the National Assembly may approve or not approve the Finance Minister’s estimates of expenditure, it has no power to change them by either reducing or increasing them. “The power to amend may involve the power to approve. But a power to approve does not imply a power to amend,” he wrote in his decision. Ramjattan filed his appeal in February. Stabroek News was reliably informed that Frances lacks support staff and is overwhelmed with dozens of appeal cases, hence the delay in setting a date despite the importance of the case.
Ramjattan questioned why someone else could not have taken up the matter in Frances’ absence. He said that this situation underscores the need for a deputy registrar officer and two or three other persons to assist Frances in executing her duties in a timely manner.
The attorney stressed that it is his view that there is a need at the Court of Appeal for more staff, given the increase in litigation, as well as more judges. While he was unable to state how many judges are based at the court, he was certain that it did not even meet the minimum number that is required. “They have to have a backup,” he said.
The case has been described as one of national importance, which ought to be treated with urgency. However, over the years there have been constant complaints about the lengthy delays before matters are heard.
Just recently a legal source had told this newspaper that these matters “take a while,” before adding that there are appeals cases from 2006 and 2007 that are now being heard in the court. From what this newspaper was told, it appears that criminal matters are given precedence over civil ones.
Acting Chancellor Carl Singh had said previously that there is a shortage of personnel to collate the records and judges are saddled with the added responsibility. Justice Singh said bluntly that nothing is being done to address the issue. He referred to it as a disastrous situation, since the judges themselves have to take the initiative of getting records of appeal collated so that they can proceed to hear cases. It is unclear if this situation still persists. Ramjattan again stressed that this case is an important one and should be treated as such. “This is such an important matter. It is just terrible.
If there is one matter that should be given priority, it should be this,” he said while adding that he will continue to inquire about the status of a start date.
Asked whether given the long delay, approaching the Caribbean Court of Justice would be an option, Ramjattan said that one would first have to “clear” the Appeal Court before going higher.
