Opposition Leader Norton asking Court to rule against President Ali’s unconstitutional action

Court Halts Maha Sabha Ashram Works as Management Dispute Deepens

Mohameds Demand Anderson Recuse Himself, Urgent Disclosure of Records

On Friday, A Partnership for National Unity and Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) Member of Parliament and Shadow Minister of Legal Affairs, and Attorney-at-law Mr. Roysdale A. Forde S.C, along with Attorney-at-law, Mr. Selwyn A. Pieters, filed a Fixed Date Application (FDA) in the High Court of Guyana against the unconstitutional action of President Irfaan Ali to appoint the Police Service Commission, and the Integrity Commission, without meaningful and substantive consultation with the Leader of the Opposition as is required under Articles 210 (1) and 232 of the Constitution of Guyana.

The case is filed on behalf of Applicant, Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Aubrey Norton; and the Respondents are: – Attorney General of and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall S.C; Commissioners, Patrick Findlay, Chandra Gajraj, Dr. Kim Kyte-Thomas, Imam Mohamed Ispahani Haniff, Pandit Hardesh Tewari, Rev. Wayne Bowman.

In a statement released on Friday, Mr. Norton, through his attorneys, is arguing that the action of President Ali to race ahead, indecently, to appoint and swear chairmen and members of those commissions, in substance, constitutes a violation in principle and practice of the law and a betrayal of the political process that allows the voices of the minority [those without economic and/or political power] to be heard and their rights recognised and respected.

It is being contested that the president’s action has far-reaching implications to the social and economic wellbeing of all Guyana, and in so far as the unlawful appointment of the Police Service Commission is concerned, the fear is that the unconstitutional action of the President could further fractionalise the Guyana Police Force.

The president’s action, it is being argued “facilitates an amplification and aggravation of extant weaknesses and vulnerabilities of the Force [which] would compromise the authority of the state agency to enforce compliance to the laws and erode public confidence in the work of the Guyana Police Force.”

Making the case for the upholding of the Constitution the applicant is contending that “it is reasonable to assume that any conceptual frame or concept of ‘One Guyana’ must by all logics and reasoning include meaningful and substantive consultation with the other half of Guyanese, who did not vote for the ruling party PPP/C, represented by the opposition.”

And further, “it is clear, very clear, that the mantra of ‘One Guyana’ does not include those, who did not vote or do not support the lopsided, uneven, unfair, and unjust policies of the government…It is also clear that the Ali-led government is not interested in good governance settled on a foundation of transparency, accountability, justice and fairness; the government is satisfied and comfortable with policies and practices that result in benefits to their friends and cronies.”

Thus, according to the Leader of the Opposition, the Opposition would not sit idly by and allow the Ali-led government and the ruling PPP/C to impose their will on the people. The APNU+AFC “will do everything possible to empower people through information and knowledge to participate in the decision-making process through community and other actions aimed at protecting and improving the quality of their lives and their communities.”