Former Speaker of the National Assembly, Ralph Ramkarran has accused the APNU+AFC government of intimidatory behaviour towards the judiciary and acting Chancellor of the Judiciary Carl Singh.
In a blistering commentary carried in yesterday’s Sunday Stabroek, Ramkarran, a Senior Counsel, also took aim at the state-owned Guyana Chronicle over the attacks on the judiciary and Justice Singh.
Ramkarran said that neither the Bar nor the Judiciary can afford to be silent on the attacks which he labelled as “unprecedented in their savagery”.
“This open, blatant and shameless intimidation, is not meant only for this Chancellor. It is a message to the next Chancellor and Chief Justice, who will be appointed shortly, and for the entire judiciary, to toe the line. Neither the judiciary, the Bar nor the public can afford to be silent at these alarming developments. If not arrested now, they will only get worse”, Ramkarran declared.
Ramkarran is the first senior member of the Bar to say anything about the attacks.
He charged: “The Guyana Chronicle’s obscene calumny against Chancellor of the Judiciary Carl Singh, over several months and getting worse, its contempt of court and the government’s intimidation of the judiciary have become deeply troubling. The Chancellor was publicly warned to go on pre-retirement leave and not to hear any ‘political’ cases. Suspicion was expressed that he would start a case and postpone it beyond his retirement date so as to seek to extend his term of office.
“What is worse is that a lawyer, Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo, who has responsibility for information and the power to stop the Chronicle since it started its disgraceful campaign several weeks ago, has allowed it to continue. The only conclusion is that the Chronicle’s rampage against the Chancellor, and subversion of the judiciary, is official government policy.”
Ramkarran added that another lawyer, Minister of Natural Resources, Raphael Trotman, “joined the bandwagon and threatened that Cabinet will ‘note’ the Chancellor’s decisions. Minister Trotman twisted the intimidatory knife in an already suppurating wound and to what end ‒ send the message home? Make sure that the Chancellor is officially humiliated by a government official? Let him know that the Cabinet will be noting his behaviour?”
Ramkarran said that the entire British government is aggrieved by the court’s decision that a parliamentary decision is required to trigger Brexit and it has appealed, as he said the Guyana government should, when it loses.
“It is more dignified than whining and insulting”, Ramkarran added.
On Friday, Chancellor Singh made a reference to the attacks. Speaking to members of the judiciary at the opening of a two-day seminar on the new Civil Procedures Rules, Justice Singh declared that he demits office on February 23rd.
He stressed that this is the day “and not before,” a comment which generated much laughter followed by loud applause. “…Not when the Chronicle says I must leave… my constitutional tenure expires on the 23rd of February, 2017, and until such time unless my appointment is revoked, I intend to exercise my functions as a judge,” Singh declared, while emphasising that up until that time he would carry out the duties and responsibilities entrusted to him.
Concerns about the government’s attack on the judiciary will likely deepen as adverse comments were also made by Attorney General Basil Williams (SC) at the PNCR’s General Council meeting on Saturday at Congress Place, Sophia. Williams, is Chairman of the PNCR, the main component of APNU. A release from the PNCR on the General Council said “The Party Chairman noted that for the first time in 23 years, orders have been made by Judges in our courts against the President (who has Constitutional Immunity from suit), Prime Minister and Attorney General, without giving them a hearing. The Chairman said that the good news was that the PNCR would continue to support the Coalition government in its efforts to restore the rule of law in Guyana.”
There was no elaboration in the PNCR statement on which matters Williams was referring to.
Ramkarran said that from one of the reports in the Chronicle, it appears that the first matter which the government had issues with was a private criminal charge against former President Bharrat Jagdeo, relating to alleged racial incitement, which was thrown out by a High Court judge. Ramkarran said that the Attorney General, who had appeared as counsel, erroneously made himself the appellant in the appeal and at an earlier hearing the Deputy Solicitor General, Prithima Kissoon, when questioned by the Court of Appeal, conceded that it was wrong for the Attorney General to be a party. Ramkarran noted that the Chronicle related that the Attorney General believed that the ‘move’ by the Deputy Solicitor General and the Chancellor was “a vain attempt to free Jagdeo of those cases.”
Said Ramkarran: “If this is not a contempt of court, I don’t know what is”.
He added “The Chancellor, apparently acting with restraint and dignity, has not summoned the Chronicle and the Attorney General before the Court of Appeal to answer charges of contempt, as he ought to have done”.
Noting that the Chronicle report transmitted dismay that Justice Singh’s court is hearing the ‘third term’ case, Ramkarran asked what was the problem.
“If the government feels that it has a good case and loses, the CCJ will reverse the decision”, he said.
“The Chancellor and judiciary are subject to public scrutiny and criticism. But these attacks are unprecedented in their savagery. Even in the 1980s, when the judiciary was under severe pressure, Chancellor Victor Crane could announce that socialist principles would guide him in his decision-making, in the sure knowledge that even if criticized, he would not be subjected to the demeaning insults, as made against Chancellor Carl Singh”, Ramkarran declared.
