Campaign co-chair for APNU+AFC Raphael Trotman says that the coalition’s manifesto, released on Thursday, has declared the intention to go after ill-gotten wealth if it wins the upcoming general elections.
He was responding yesterday to a claim by Attorney General Anil Nandlall that the APNU+AFC manifesto would pave the way for appropriation of private property.
“Anil Nandlall is not recognised by members of the legal profession as being an expert in his field and so it is not surprising that he is unable to grasp the legal fundamentals and ground breaking reforms that are proposed,” Trotman, who is a practising attorney told Stabroek News last evening.
In a statement, Nandlall yesterday expounded on several legal aspects of the coalition’s law reform plan.
The first point raised concerns private property. According to Nandlall this “frightening” statement appears in the manifesto: “Rights to personal property will be protected where the asset has been fairly acquired.”
According to the Attorney General, “the seeds are being sown for the expropriation of private property, if in the opinion of the partnership, it has not been fairly acquired.” He added that this is a threat to personal property everywhere and is indeed, a proposition that makes every statement in “that manifesto about the rule of law and about the bill of rights ring hollow. By this statement the Coalition is saying to the Guyanese people that they will determine, whether persons acquired their property fairly and if in the opinion of the Coalition, the property was not fairly acquired then it is liable to be seized”. According to Nandlall, what is printed in the manifesto surrounding this issue is “constitutional anarchy being prescribed” and he called on Guyanese to take cognisance.
“This authoritarian assault on the constitutionally enshrined right to own property must be carefully noted by the electorate. At a minimum, the coalition has been decent enough to forewarn the population that private property will no longer be safe,” he said.
Asked by Stabroek News about the comments made by Nandlall on this subject, Trotman said the coalition’s stance is that property acquired through corruption or criminal activity will be examined and be subject to seizure. He said that the word “fairly” in the manifesto is a euphemism for “legally and judiciously.”
Nandlall, in his statement, also criticised the coalition’s proposal for the establishment of a Constitutional Reform Committee, saying that one has been in place for the last three years but it met no more than thrice under the chairmanship of David Granger who is the coalition’s presidential candidate.
Court of Appeal
He also said that under the banner of “Consti-tutional Reform”, the coalition has made some “bizarre” proposals, including the bypass of the Court of Appeal in instances where decisions in certain constitutional matters are being challenged. Those matters, the coalition says, will go directly to the Caribbean Court of Justice.
“No explanation, whatsoever, is offered for this most weird procedure. What sinister motive do they have for ostracizsng an important link in the hierarchical chain of our Judiciary? Why this vote of no confidence against our Guyana Court of Appeal?” he emphasized.
He said that the coalition will be effectively removing the Court of Appeal from the appellate process, thereby leaving the citizen with only one forum to which a High Court decision can be appealed, the Caribbean Court of Justice.
However Trotman explained that the coalition feels that the country is in need of a Constitutional Court that is comprised of a full bench of judges. “It is unfair to ask the Chief Justice to hear and determine all constitutional matters, especially those dealing with vexed questions that pertain to the Parliament (National Assembly and Executive),” he said. Trotman told Stabroek News that as a consequence of this the coalition will explore ways to give the CCJ an “original jurisdiction” to hear matters of a grave constitutional nature. According to Trotman, the CCJ option will not only be an expeditious process, but it will also broaden the number of minds that will consider the intricate legal issues.
The coalition in its manifesto also says it will reduce the immunities of the President but according to Nandlall this was already done during the 2001 Constitutional Reform process. “Today, it is no different from any other Head of State in the civilised world…In their effort to fool the electorate, they are promising to make a mockery of the highest office of the land. What is the rationale for reducing Presidential powers but adding three Vice Presidents to the Cabinet in the same government?” he asked.
He pointed out that a promise has been made that the new Constitution will enshrine freedom of speech and the “Bill of Rights.” He said that every citizen knows that our Constitution already enshrines these two fundamental rights and freedoms. “Indeed, when we reformed the Constitution in 2001, we expanded the Bill of Rights over and above almost every country in the English speaking Caribbean and perhaps every country in the entire Commonwealth,” he said.
Nandlall stated that the manifesto promises to address the delays in confirming the appointment of members of the Judiciary and “rationalize the position of the Chief Justice and the Chancellor of the Judiciary.” “This is more than comical since the entire country knows that it is the Leader of the Opposition who has steadfastly refused to agree for the confirmation of the current office holders of these two positions as is required by the Constitution,” he said. The Leader of the Opposition David Granger did not agree with the proposal that had been made on these two positions by President Donald Ramotar.
The freedom of information law, which is being proposed in the manifesto, Nandlall said, was enacted four years ago. The opposition has raised several concerns in the past about this legislation.
Commenting on the repeal of the recall legislation, Nandlall noted that this is the very piece of legislation which the coalition called for and which they voted in support of in the National Assembly in the 9th Parliament.
Meanwhile, Trotman stressed that the coalition’s manifesto has been drafted by experts in their respective fields. He told Stabroek News that the component on law reform is no different and was “both developed and scrutinised by recognised legal experts here and abroad.” He said that Nandlall’s “shallow comments are not worthy of a rebuttal.”
The manifesto, he told this newspaper, is a covenant with the people and “we didn’t painstakingly fashion it for the PPP but for the people. Therefore, we are neither impressed nor intimidated by the PPP’s comments.”
