Dear Editor,
I commenced subscribing to Lexis Nexis, (UK), publishers of The Com-monwealth Law Reports, approximately twelve years ago. I still do. The arrangement is that individual Law Reports are shipped to me in my name at my law office along with an invoice which is paid by me upon receipt of the reports. In discussions which I had with President Donald Ramotar, immediately prior to my appointment as Attorney-General and Minister of Legal Affairs, I specifically requested, as a condition of my service, that the Government of Guyana take over payment arrangements for these books during my tenure as a Minister. This was agreed upon as a condition of my service as Attorney-General and Minister of Legal Affairs.
Lexis Nexis was accordingly informed and some time during my tenure, the payment arrangement for these books was changed and the ministry began to pay for these books in pursuance of the aforesaid arrangement. When I demitted office, I so informed Lexis Nexis and requested that the payment arrangement which existed hitherto be re-activated. This was done.
I am aware that for decades prior to this, the Government of Guyana, like other governments, through its various agencies, paid for professional and technical publications, journals, periodicals, magazines, etc, for ministers and professional and technical personnel, as a standard operational expenditure. Membership and subscription fees to professional bodies, locally and internationally, are also sometimes paid.
On or about the 20th of May, 2015, when I formally handed over to my successor, I fully briefed him on this matter. I do not recall him raising any objections whatsoever. A few months later, when I read in the press that an investigation was being launched into, inter alia, these very books, I enquired of the Attorney- General the reason for this investigation. I reminded him that I had earlier fully briefed him on this matter. His response was that I should stay out of this matter and that this is a matter between him and the Permanent Secretary.
During the course of the investigation, I was asked by the Auditor-General to furnish a response in respect of the said books. I did so in writing. Former President, Donald Ramotar, wrote a letter confirming the particular condition of my contract for service in respect of these books. In those circumstances, the Auditor-General made no adverse finding against me or the Permanent Secretary. This seemed to have enraged the Attorney-General and he enquired of me why I defended the Permanent Secretary. It became more than obvious that the removal of the Permanent Secretary was his ultimate objective and that my intervention was an obstacle. However, I felt compelled to defend an innocent professional woman who was, obviously, the victim of a political vendetta. For this, I offer no regrets.
You will note that this disclosure by the Attorney-General has come upon the heels of my statement in the press in response to Gecom’s press release on the legal position in respect of the local authority organs where there have been tied seats. In my response, I pointed out that Gecom’s interpretation of the law accords with mine, and indeed, every public commentator who spoke on this issue; that only the Attorney- General and the Minister of Communities laboured under a different interpretation; that even the government’s Commissioners at Gecom disagreed with their interpretation and that the Attorney-General is defending that which is indefensible. My statement was published in the press on the 19th of May, 2016, the very day that the Attorney-General made his disclosures. My response must have, proverbially, broken the camel’s back. However, my silence on matters of public importance can never be purchased, whatever may be the price.
I do not propose to say more on this issue.
Yours faithfully,
Mohabir Anil Nandlall, MP