Referencing new information being brought to the fore, Attorney General (AG) Anil Nandlall SC is renewing his calls for the striking out of the action brought late last year on behalf of the 26 Haitian nationals who were detained for weeks at the state-run Hugo Chavez Centre for Rehabilitation and Reintegration.
Among other things, Nandlall says that the respondent—Allandres Archer in whose name the action was filed on behalf of the Haitians has since indicated that he had no idea that a court action would be initiated in his name and that he never agreed to anything of that nature.
Against this background, the AG has filed a Notice of Application (NOA) asking the Chief Justice to strike out the challenge.
The foreign nationals who have all apparently since left Guyana, had filed an action through attorney Darren Wade who contended that their fundamental rights had been violated by the Government of Guyana.
At a December 18th hearing before acting Chief Justice Roxane George-Wiltshire SC, Nandlall had asked the court to dismiss the case, as the whereabouts of the subjects of the application were unknown at the time, even as he stated that they had already left Guyana.
The chief justice had, however, denied Nandlall’s request noting that based on her assessment of the application, there are numerous issues on the submissions presented by the state that need to be addressed.
She said, too, that contrary to Nandlall’s contention, the issues that need to be addressed are not necessarily academic but for future guidance on how such a matter should dealt with.
She had said also, that the absence of the subjects of applicant in the court and by extension the country does not mean that they do not want to proceed with the case.
Advancing, however, what he describes as revelations being made by Archer, The AG is now asking the court to stay those directions it had given until it would have fully heard his strike-out application.
He deposes in his NOA that a video recording of Archer has been made public, containing revelations which according to him affect the very validity of the proceedings, to the extent he said, that if the proceedings were not validly instituted then the court cannot lawfully interrogate a case upon which it has no jurisdiction.
The Court, he said, must satisfy itself that the proceedings do not suffer the defect of lack of authorization from he who seeks to move the court.
According to Nandlall, Archer in a video recording obtained from the National Communications Network indicated that he had no knowledge that he was the person bringing the action against the government.
According to the AG, Archer indicated that the Association of Haitian Nationals in Guyana had asked him to give Wade an affidavit as a witness of what transpired the night the Haitians were arrested.
According to Nandlall, Archer said that submitting that affidavit was the extent of what he agreed to do.
Nandlall said it was the duty of Wade as an attorney to inform Archer of the contents of the documents and the consequences of the execution of such documents, before he proceeded to sign them.
Nandlall said that Archer did admit to signing some documents, but that he said he was unaware of what he was signing.
Nandlall who is also the Minister of Legal Affairs alleged that Wade breached his duty as an attorney by not informing Archer of the contents of the documents and the consequences of the execution of the documents.
The contention of the legal affairs minister is that the proceedings were instituted by Wade without the authority of the apparent respondent “which is so fundamental a flaw as to make the proceedings a nullity.”
The AG said it is now incumbent upon Wade to prove that he had lawful authority to institute the proceedings; while stating that an attorney cannot advocate for a respondent who has indicated that he did not authorize the institution of the proceedings.
Nandlall advances that Archer is currently a party to the proceedings against his will.
Moreover, the AG said that Wade also breached his duty to the court when he brought the action knowing that he did not have the proper authority to do so.
On these grounds, Nandlall is seeking to have the case thrown out.
The matter is scheduled to be called again next Wednesday—January 27th.
Last December, Justice George-Wiltshire granted a conservatory order staying a previous order made by Principal Magistrate Sherdel Isaacs-Marcus for the 26 Haitian nationals to be deported.
The foreign nationals, including seven children, had been detained for weeks at the state-run Hugo Chavez Centre for Rehabilitation and Reintegration.
They were to be deported for allegedly lying about where they would be staying during their visit to Guyana.
According to Wade, the action is “arbitrary” and was conducted with a clear disregard to his clients’ rights to natural justice.
“They were not informed of, nor allowed to respond to the charge. There is no evidence I have seen supporting the contention made in the applications,” he had previously told Stabroek News in an invited comment.
The Ministry of Home Affairs announced during the latter part of November that the Haitian nationals were found after the police conducted two search-and-cordon exercises in Georgetown and Region Ten.
Some of the Haitian nationals were discovered in a city hotel, while others were found in a minibus on the Linden-Mabura road.
According to a ministry statement, the discovery was made as part of an investigation into a suspected human smuggling racket and trafficking in persons ring.
The Haitians have, however, denied any involvement in trafficking.
Wade, in presenting their case, had argued that since those detained had committed no crime or been accused of committing any crime, their detention was illegal.
The AG’s Chambers had, however, disclosed that the Haitians were being kept in custody for deportation.
