Attorney General (AG) Basil Williams SC has declined again to publicly state how much Grenadian Queen’s Counsel Dr Francis Alexis was paid for his services in the no-confidence case when it was before the Guyana Court of Appeal.
“The attorney is very respected, a genuine scholar and author of leading texts on Administrative Law and our changing Caribbean Constitutions. So he was remunerated appropriately,” Williams told reporters on Monday. At the time, he was answering questions from the news media shortly after a meeting with a group of European Union (EU) Ambassadors.
When asked to specifically state how much money was paid, he said “no I don’t wish to…”
Following the passage of a no-confidence motion against the APNU+AFC government by a 33-32 margin on December 21, the administration had taken the matter to court. In March, government announced that Dr Alexis was being added to its legal team. Observers have questioned how much the Senior Lecturer at the University of the West Indies, Cave Hill Campus in Barbados, was being paid.
Minister of State Joseph Harmon on March 29 was unable to state the amount but advised that questions on the issue be directed to Williams.
“…The gentleman has to be paid for his services,” he said before adding that Williams can provide more details. Harmon was also unable to say whether Dr Alexis will be part of the government’s team when the case is heard by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).
The AG Chambers had decried as counterfeit, a voucher purporting to be for the payment of Dr Alexis for services being rendered to the Guyana Government.
The image of the voucher containing the figure of $72.8 million, was posted on the Facebook page of former AG Anil Nandlall and the AG’s Chambers/ Ministry of Legal Affairs asked for it to be removed. This was subsequently done.
Nandlall later criticised Williams for sidestepping queries about how much Dr Alexis has been paid.
“It is obvious that the citizenry is concerned about and wants to know of the expenditure these cases are costing them as it was the subject of news stories by the press but the Attorney General has refused to make this information available to the public. Indeed, this is information to which the public is entitled, as it involves the expenditure of public funds and, therefore, the Attorney-General has (a) duty to disseminate this information to the public,” he argued.
Chancellor of the Judiciary Yonette Cummings-Edwards and Justice of Appeal Dawn Gregory both accepted Dr Alexis’ argument that the incorrect formula was used to tabulate the votes required and this resulted in the no-confidence motion being passed by 33 votes to 32, rather than the needed “absolute” majority of 34.
On behalf of the Guyana government, Dr Alexis had reasoned that in Guyana’s 65-member National Assembly, half would result in a fraction of 32.5. If it is to be rounded to the next whole number, that figure will be 33 and, in accordance with the practice and the application of the meaning of majority, one has to be added to calculate a majority.
That decision was appealed at the CCJ and oral arguments are to be heard on May 10.
