By majority decision, the Local Government Commission (LGC) on Tuesday passed a motion to delegate statutory functions, including the approval of temporary appointments, to the Chairperson and Vice-Chair—a move that is being seen as conflicting with the law by the opposition, which plans to challenge it in court.
The motion was tabled by Chairman Julius Faerber and passed by a simple majority.
In his motion, titled “Motion to delegate specific tasks to executive management of the Local Government Commission,” Faerber – who served as Chairman of Region Three for over a decade – argued that the once per month statutory meeting of the Commission is not enough to address the plethora of issues that face local democratic organs.
“Given the immense magnitude of the decision-making required to service all of the local government organs around the country, the once-monthly statutory meeting of the Commissioner is insufficient to deal with all matters in a manner that is required for the smooth operations of the local organs,” the motion states.
It added, “The rationale of this Motion is to ensure the efficient management of the activities of the various local government organs would not be constrained in any way based on the sole monthly statutory meetings of the Commission to approve decisions which are required as a matter of urgency.”
Faerber noted that the Commission derives its mandate from both the Constitution and the LGC Act. Article 78 A of the Constitution states “Parliament shall establish a Local Government Commission, the composition and rules of which empower the commission to deal with as it deems fit, all matters related to the regulation and staffing of local government organs and with dispute resolution within and between local government organs.”
Additionally, Section 13(1) of the LGC Act sets out the specific regulatory and oversight responsibilities with which the Commission is equipped.
Section 13 provides, “The Commission shall have power to deal with all matters relating to the regulation and staffing of local government organs including employment and dismissal of staff and with dispute resolution within and between local government organs, and in particular shall – (a) monitor, and review the performance and implementation of policies of all local government organs, including policies of taxation and protection of the environment: (b) monitor, evaluate and make recommendations on policies, procedures and practices of all local government organs in order to promote effective local governance; (c) investigate any matter under its purview and propose remedial action to the Minister, whenever or wherever necessary; (d) monitor and review all existing and proposed legislation, and or policies and measures relating to local government organs and make recommendations for any legislation or any a amendments to any legislation and or policy to the Minister, (e) examine and propose ways of enhancing the capacity of local government organs.”
He argued that it is in the “interest of administrative expediency” that the Commission approves the motion to grant the in house Executive Management [Chair and Vice Chair] four specific functions. They are: “[power to approve] temporary, acting and general non-permanent appointments to local government organs; approval of leave for local government officers in situations that require urgency; approval of administrative leave of local movement officers to facilitate disciplinary investigations; and approval of statutory and salary increases for local government officers which have been approved at the level of central government and local organs.”
The motion provides for the decisions to be ratified by the full Commission whenever statutory meetings are held.
The LGC consists of eight members – Faerber, Carol Sooba, Norman Whittaker, Clinton Collymore, Joan-Ann Romascindo, Nicola Trotman, Clement Corlette and Carvil Duncan.
The opposition members – Romascindo, Trotman, Corlette – did not participate in the passage of the motion.
Stabroek News understands that the motion was circulated two days before the May 31, 2022 meeting and the opposition commissioners argued that it was not enough time to peruse and make informed choices.
However, there is no provision in the Act for the delegation of statutory powers to the Chair and Vice-Chair, but to the local government organs themselves. Section 19 of the LGC Act states “The Commission may delegate, in written form, to any local government organ authority to perform duties and discharge functions on its behalf as it may determine.”
The Act also provides for meetings to be held at the discretion of the Commission. Section 15 (2) states: “The Commission shall meet at the times as may be necessary or expedient for the transaction of its business…”
Stabroek News attempted to contact Faerber but those efforts were unsuccessful. Calls to Minister of Local Government and Regional Development Nigel Dharamlall’s phone also went unanswered.
Legal action
Meanwhile, Shadow Minister of Local Government and Regional Development Ganesh Mahipaul said that the opposition would be seeking the court’s interpretation of the laws governing the Commission.
“I would like to say that the Commission does have the authority to delegate but it must delegate to a local democratic organ and not an individual. [Definitely] not individuals within the Commission. So on that basis, I will like to signal my intention and the intention of the Coalition to seek the Court’s interpretation and guidance as to the legality of what I will consider a motion that should not have been there in the first place,” he said.
Mahipaul added that if the issue lies with the time in between meetings, then the Act provides for much more frequent meetings.
“I find this extremely strange…I know the law to be different and outside of the fact that I know that the law does not permit delegating specific functions to individuals, I am going to support a legal challenge to this resolution and let the court guide us as to whether that move by the Commission is proper.
“This motion in my humble view is illegal and should not have been passed at the Local Government Commission’s statutory meeting. It is my view that the Commission should have sought legal advice before proceeding to pass this motion. As you can see from this motion, it speaks to delegating specific tasks to the executive management of the Local Government Commission. The laws of Guyana are quite clear, the authority lies with the Commission and at no time can that Commission decide by way of a simple majority to give its functions and its authority to single individuals that are holding specific offices within the Commission,” he related.
Since taking the helm of the LGC, Faerber has been criticised for a number of the decisions he has taken. Last year, he unilaterally appointed junior staff member Candace Nelson to act as Town Clerk of the city of Georgetown.
“I am the Commission between meetings. I am the Chairman. I have that authority to make that decision between meetings. It’s stated in the Act,” Faerber had told Stabroek News following accusations by two opposition-nominated members of the LGC that he unilaterally appointed Nelson without consulting the other members of the body.
