Attorney General Basil Williams SC on Wednesday said the selection of Senior Counsel (SC) is at the discretion of the president, who can alter the list of candidates recommended to him by the Chancellor of the Judiciary.
Approached by Stabroek News at the High Court, Williams insisted that attorney Timothy Jonas did not meet the requirements and will have to gain a few more years of legal experience before he can be considered.
The last Sunday Stabroek reported that Jonas was informed by a Ministry of the Presidency official that he was going to be appointed SC. After the announcement that he was involved in the establishment of new political party, A New and United Guyana (ANUG), he was informed that there was a reconsideration.
Based on the information provided, sometime in November or early December of last year, Jonas was informed by Chancellor of the Judiciary (ag) Yonette Cummings-Edwards that he received the approval of the judges to be appointed SC and that she would be communicating that to the executive.
On Christmas Eve, Chief of Protocol at the Ministry of the Presidency Vic Persaud contacted Jonas at his home to inform him that upon the judges’ recommendation, he was being appointed SC and that in the coming days he would receive his documentation and invitation to the ceremony.
The following day, this newspaper published a story about the formation of ANUG. Five days later, Persaud informed Jonas that the executive had reconsidered the decision.
A few days later, the Ministry of the Presidency announced five new SC. Jonas’ name was not included.
Questioned on Wednesday about the criteria used for selection of new SC and who sets them, Williams said they were developed by President David Granger himself. “The president is a disciplined person, you know, and he always has criteria for these things. You must be fit and proper, but one of the criteria you are dealing with is the length of service,” he said, while noting that Llewellyn John, who is close to 90-years-old, was one of those overlooked for 18 to 20 years.
He did not provide a clear answer on whether this criteria has been shared with the judiciary. Jonas was admitted to the bar in 1996.
“[Stephen] Fraser is 33 years (in the profession). If you check every year, the people are 30 years going up. [K] Juman Yassin is 49 years. Mr Jonas cannot be in that group. He just has to wait,” Williams stressed.
Fraser was among those named SC at the start of the year.
Williams said the question of why Jonas was placed on the list when he did not meet the criteria should be directed to the Chancellor even as he insisted that the president is the person that determines who is a Senior Counsel.
Williams declined to say if there was anyone else whose name was recommended but was not conferred with ‘silk.’
“I can’t discuss that… All I am saying to you is that the Chancellor recommends, the president will deliberate on who should be [and] obviously he has to make checks in relation to his criteria,” he said.
Asked if the president can choose someone from outside the list, Williams responded “yes… he has done that… Fitz Peters was not on the list, as far as I can recall. [K] Juman Yassin was not on any list and so the president has a discretion to correct wrongs,” he said. Both Peters and Yassin were appointed Senior Counsel in 2018.
Asked if he himself was recommended by the judiciary or was handpicked by the president, Williams said, “I was recommended by Chancellor [Desiree] Bernard, since then. So my name would have come with the judiciary, yes.” When pressed further, he said his name would have been on the very first list. Asked if this would have been the list submitted by the judiciary, he said “it must have been there. I am a leading lawyer.”
Williams was one of nine attorneys appointed SC in 2017, when the first set of new appointments were made in 20 years. Also on that list were John, Neil Aubrey Boston, Charles Fung-A-Fat, Chief Justice (Ag) Roxane George-Wiltshire, Rafiq Khan, Vidyanand Persaud, Rosalie Althea Robertson and retired judge Claudette Singh.
‘Politicised’
Attorney Sanjeev Datadin has expressed concern at the treatment of Jonas, saying that the administration has desecrated the process used to select SC.
Datadin concluded that the silk honour was recalled because of Jonas’ decision to form a political party. “He didn’t do anything dastardly to the Bar or to get thrown out of the profession. He has no disciplinary issues brought during that time. It’s a series of facts that we know and when we follow them one by one, it leads to one conclusion. The only notable thing he did was to be [come] involved in a political movement,” he had reasoned during an interview with this newspaper.
When this was put to Williams, he responded “I can’t enter into that. I don’t know what’s in the mind of people. What I know is that he was not identified in the process that is used,” he said.
Williams said, too, that he was not the person to inquire from Persaud whether he had indeed informed Jonas that he was going to be appointed SC.
“That is a matter for the Ministry of the Presidency,” he said, while adding that he is doubtful that the decision to recall, had anything to do with Jonas entering in the political arena. “I doubt that. We don’t operate like that. That might have been a coincidence. How would you know he is entering…?” he said.
Told that it was after the announcement was made that Jonas was reportedly contacted again and told that the SC honour was being recalled, Williams insisted that it was a coincidence.
Former Attorney General Anil Nandlall said what has occurred is a direct result of “everything in Guyana is being politicised.” He went on to say that politics is occupying and devouring all the space in this country.
Asked about the treatment of prominent attorney Nigel Hughes during his tenure as AG, Nandlall said back then it was now retired Chancellor (ag) Carl Singh who had responsibility for compiling the list. “I wouldn’t know. My role would have been to convey [the list to the president],” he said, while stressing that no list came to him while he held office.
Reminded that during the PPP/C administration then president Bharrat Jagdeo had declared that Hughes would not get silk, Nandlall said that this is a question for the now opposition leader. Asked if this had not been politicising the process, he stressed, “You should raise that with Mr. Jagdeo. I am saying that the process should not be politicised and that is my position. It’s not a political process and it should not be politicised.”
Explaining the process as he knows it, Nandlall said that the Chancellor of the Judiciary, after consulting with the judges and members of the inner bar (Senior Counsel), would invite lawyers to make applications for silk and the names of those approved by the Chancellor would be transmitted through the Attorney General to the president. “The president’s role here is a ceremonial role since the president is unfamiliar and is unaware of the attributes of the lawyers. The judges are regarded as the institution that is qualified to assess the performance of the lawyers. The Attorney General is simply a conduit because judges ought not to have direct contact with the president,” he said, before adding that this system insulates the process from political interference.
Nandlall, who has over 20 years of legal experience, said that he was invited to apply by Justice Singh. “That application was made and then we went to elections, the parliament was prorogued before that and we went into elections,” he recalled, while adding that in 2017 he was again invited to apply by the acting Chancellor Cummings-Edwards. He claimed that he was subsequently told that his application was “sent off and rejected by the president.”
Nandlall rubbished Williams’ claim that it is the president who sets the criteria for such an appointment. “Absolutely not. The president has no capacity to… look this is an honour and from the time you leave it to politicians, it becomes the subject of a political exercise of discretion.”
He said that there is no criteria of 30 years and that benchmark is now being used because the AG got his then and doesn’t want anyone to get it before.
“Mr. Forbes Burnham got it long before 30 years. I believe Mr. JOF Haynes got it, Dr. [Fenton] Ramsahoye got it. Dr. [Mohamed] Shahabuddeen got it. Eddie Luckhoo got it. Thirty years was never a [criterion],” he said.
Nandlall insisted that the president has no authority to interfere in the selection process.
“There are certain things that a president has the power to do, which is perhaps [like] National Awards and that kind of thing but here, his role is purely ceremonial because you are dealing with the expertise of people and that is why the system was designed to allow those who are better positioned to assess the expertise along with other character traits of individuals,” he said, while adding that like Jonas he was “a victim of that since 2017.”
