On the 13th May 2022, Justice Franklin Holder dismissed an application filed by Anand Sanasie personally and in his capacity as the Secretary of the Guyana Cricket Board (GCB) and others against cricket ombudsman Kamal Ramkarran and others challenging the GCB elections that were held on 29th March 2021.
Those elections were held after prolonged controversy at the GCB and other cricketing bodies in the country.
According to a release yesterday from the Attorney General’s Chambers, the challenge by Sanasie and others stemmed from the operation of the The Guyana Cricket Administration Act.
Aside from Ramkarran, the other respondents were the Minister of Culture, Youth and Sport Charles Ramson, Attorney General Anil Nandlall SC and the Demerara, Berbice and Guyana cricket boards.
In upholding the written and oral submissions of the Respondents, the release said that Justice Holder found that the issues are governed by Sections 7, 17 and 18 of the Act which speak to the first Cricket Ombudsman appointed by the Minister under the Act and not Section 10 which speaks to the subsequent Ombudsman elected by the GCB.
In relation to the first issue, the release said that Sanasie and the other applicants contended that the Minister of Sport was required, prior to appointing the Cricket Ombudsman, to engage in “meaningful consultation” with Cricket West Indies (CWI) and that there was no meaningful consultation. The release said that the Judge considered the Applicants’ authorities on what constitutes meaningful consultation but found the reasoning of the then Chief Justice Ian Chang in Essequibo Cricket Board 2015- HC- CIV-DEM- CM- 2 to be reasonable. In that case, the release said that CJ Chang held that “meaningful consultation was not an absolute procedural requirement. It was a provisional or conditional procedural requirement, breach of that procedural requirement could not and did not render the act of appointment invalid”. Justice Holder therefore held that Ramkarran’s appointment as the Cricket Ombudsman was lawful and in compliance with Sections 7 and 17 of the Act.
In relation the second issue, the release said that Sanasie and the other applicants contended that the Cricket Ombudsman was required to establish and verify a Register of clubs prior to the holding of the elections. The Judge in upholding the submissions of the Respondents found that the Act does not define what is a register of clubs nor does it speak to the Cricket Ombudsman establishing a register of clubs, the release said. It added that the judge held that it is unreasonable for the Cricket Ombudsman to create the register of clubs and then verify same. He found that by Section 9 of the Act it was the County Boards who shall keep a register of clubs within their respective County. It was for the Cricket Ombudsman to then verify the register of clubs and determine the method he uses to verify same as the verification process is not prescribed in the Act. The Judge therefore considered the method used by Ramkarran as laid out in his Affidavit. In doing so, the release said that he found that the Essequibo Cricket Board was non-compliant and therefore they cannot use their reluctance to comply, to prevent the holding of the elections. The Judge therefore held that Ramkarran as the Cricket Ombudsman did his best and complied with the provisions of the Act prior to the holding of the elections on the 29th March 2021.
The release said that the court therefore dismissed the Application with costs to be paid to the Attorney General, Ramkarran and the Guyana Cricket Board in the sum of $350,000 each.
The release said that Sanasie and the other applicants were represented by Pratesh Satram and Ron Motilall. The Minister of Culture ,Youth and Sport and the Attorney General were represented by Nandlall; Deborah Kumar, Deputy Solicitor General and Saabira Ali Hydaralie and Teakaram Singh, State Counsel. Ramkarran represented himself and the Demerara Cricket Board, Berbice Cricket Board and Guyana Cricket Board were represented by Arudranauth Gossai.
