Former Minister of Finance, Winston Jordan has been cleared of the charge of misconduct in public office after a Magistrate’s Court found that the Special Organized Crime Unit (SOCU) had not proved its case against him.
Stabroek News understands that following the prosecution’s tendering of all of its witness statements and documents yesterday, Magistrate Leron Daly sitting in the Georgetown Magistrate’s Court ruled that Jordan had no case to answer.
Jordan yesterday express relief at the decision. He told Stabroek News “I feel relieved; this was like the sword of Damocles hanging over my head, sullying my name”.
The ruling, Stabroek News understands, came after the Court’s finding that Jordan could not be considered a public officer because he had been appointed a minister and not a public officer in the public service.
It is unclear at this time whether SOCU will be filing an appeal, though sources say that this is likely.
Back in December of 2021, SOCU brought the charge against Jordan.
It had always been the contention of his legal team led by Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde, that Jordan was not a public officer.
However, the prosecution had submitted that the Chief Justice had made a ruling in the case of Brassington and Singh vs the Chief Magistrate in Application 757 of 2018 that Dr Ashni Singh, who was also a Finance Minister, was considered a public officer and that Article 232 of the Constitution of Guyana provides that, a “public officer means the holder of any public office and includes any person appointed to act in such office inter alia.”
Stabroek News understands, however, that from the case presented by SOCU, Jordan was not found to have been a public officer, a circumstance on which it was hoping to ground the misconduct charge.
It had been alleged that Jordan, being and performing duties of Minister of Finance and being the concerned Minister for the National Industrial and Commercial Investments Limited (NICIL), a company owned by the Government of Guyana, between February 26, 2020, and Friday, July 31, 2020, at Main Street, Georgetown, wilfully misconducted himself by acting recklessly when he signed a Transfer of Property Order, transferring to and vesting to BK Marine Inc. over 2.553 acres at Mudlots 1 & 2, F of Mudlot 3, A, B & D, situated at North Cummingsburg, Georgetown.
It was claimed that the property, which is valued at over $5 billion, was sold for $20,260,276, a price that was grossly undervalued to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust and without reasonable excuse or justification.
Hammered
Attorney General Anil Nandlall SC yesterday flayed the decision. Without naming the magistrate he charged that a precedent existed in a decision by the acting Chief Justice which would have secured the prosecution’s case.
“In recent times, I have been forced to undertake the unfortunate task to offer genuine critical commentary on the manner in which certain criminal cases are being adjudicated upon in the Magistracy. Another such occasion has regrettably presented itself”, he said.
He stated that the Magistrate predicated her ruling on a finding in law that as Minister of Finance, Jordan was not a Public Officer, an important ingredient in the offence.
Based upon inquiries made, he said that he was informed that the learned Magistrate received from the State written submissions supported by judicial authorities, including, a written ruling delivered by Chief Justice (ag) Roxane George SC in the matter of Winston Brassington and Dr. Ashni Singh v Munilal Persaud, Commissioner of Police, Ann McLennan, Chief Magistrate and Shalimar Ali-Hack, Director of Public Prosecutions 2018-HC-DEM-CIV-FDA-757.
In that case, Nandlall noted that Singh was charged with the identical offence regarding certain acts he performed while he was Minister of Finance and placed before the Georgetown Magistrate’s Court. The validity of the charge was challenged in the High Court on the identical ground, that is, as Minister of Finance, Singh was not a Public Officer for the purposes of the charge.
Nandlall noted that the matter was heard by Chief Justice George who, after hearing detailed submissions from both counsel for Singh and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), ruled that Singh may be charged with the offence of Misconduct in Public Office notwithstanding that he was a Minister. This ruling was delivered on November 18, 2020 and was never appealed, Nandlall said, added that it remains the law on the issue.
“First-year law students are taught that the doctrine of Stare Decisis, by virtue of which the decision of the High Court on a particular principle of law, is binding precedent on a Magistrate, to the extent that the Magistrate has no jurisdictional freedom to depart from that High Court’s decision.
The two cases are almost identical in both issues of facts and law, and the decision of the learned Chief Justice in the Singh and Brassington case constitutes a binding precedent on the learned Magistrate. Clearly, the learned Magistrate erred in law by refusing to follow the decision of the learned Chief Justice. Such an elementary egregious error has excited great public concern within a few hours and inevitably will shake the public confidence in the administration of justice. For to the public, it appears that they are different standards being applied to different persons by the administration of justice”, Nandlall argued.
He said that the accused has walked free after vesting title of a State asset valued at over US$40 million to a private company for which the State received a mere US $100,000. Worse yet, he said that this was done months after the Government of which he was part, had already lost the March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections but remained in Government for five months thereafter.
