APNU/AFC illegally-appointed Ministers did not repay State salaries collected

The parliamentary Opposition called for Tourism, Industry and Commerce Minister, Oneidge Walrond to replay her accumulated salary and emoluments to the State after the High Court found on Thursday that her appointment was done in breach of the Constitution. However, former APNU/AFC Minister within the Social Protection Ministry, Keith Scott and Citizenship Minister Winston Felix did not follow suit to refund such when the Court of Appeal found back in January that they illegally occupied seats in Parliament for several years.
At a press conference, former coalition Minister and AFC Executive, David Patterson defended that these monies were not repaid by his colleagues, since no action was brought to force a recoup.

“It obviously means somebody would have to bring an action on that part. I don’t think anyone brought an action on that part. That does not alleviate the fact that we are going to proceed on this particular one,” Patterson contended.
Vice Chairperson of the party, Cathy Hughes furthered, “any party who had a grievance could have brought an action.”

Last January, the bench of Justices of Appeal Rishi Persaud and Dawn Gregory and High Court Judge Franklyn Holder unanimously ruled that Ministers Felix and Scott cannot become Technocrat Ministers under Articles 103(3) and 105 of the Constitution and as such, are not allowed to vote since they were not elected by the people.
They agreed with the argument put forward by then former Attorney General, Anil Nandlall that the Ministers were elected as members of the National Assembly pursuant to paragraph Two of Article 60 or Article 160 (2) of the Constitution, as defined by Article 232 of the Constitution.

Once elected by the people, the Constitution does not permit such a person to sit in the National Assembly without being able to vote; it is only those persons who are not on a list, and, therefore, did not face the electorate, who can sit in the National Assembly without the right to vote.
This judgement was delivered five years after the coalition was sworn into office, meaning that a significant sum should have been repaid by the Ministers, who illegally occupied a Parliamentary seat while collecting a salary for that respective position.

On Thursday, underlining the PPP’s Government’s commitment to respecting the rule of law and upholding the Constitution of Guyana, Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister Anil Nandlall conceded that the initial appointments of Oneidge Walrond as Tourism, Industry, and Commerce Minister and as Member of Parliament (MP) were done in breach of the Constitution.

The Attorney General made this admission before Chief Justice Roxane George during the hearing of an application filed by Opposition Chief Whip Christopher Jones, who had asked the court to declare the appointment unlawful as it breached Articles 103 (3), 105, and 155 (1) of the Constitution.
Article 155 (1) prevents dual citizens from sitting in the National Assembly. It states: “No person shall be qualified for election as a member of the National Assembly who (a) is by virtue of his or own act, under acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience or allegiance to a foreign power or state.”
Nandlall, who appeared on behalf of Minster Walrond, admitted that her appointments “may have collided with the Constitution.”

“There was a recognition that the appointment was not done in accordance with the Constitution,” the Attorney General said. According to him, the Government has since taken steps to rectify this constitutional violation by having Walrond re-sworn in as Minister on December 1, 2020, before President Irfaan Ali.
He added that Minister Walrond will be taking a new oath as an unelected Member of Parliament at the next sitting of the National Assembly. For his part, Jones’s lawyer, Roysdale Forde, an Opposition MP, asked the Chief Justice to award costs against Minister Walrond as their arguments had been dismissed by the Minister’s lawyers.

Nandlall maintained that the legality of all actions and or decisions of Minister Waldron before December 1, 2020, would be saved and cured by the De Facto Doctrine and the Doctrine of Necessity – a proposition with which he said the Chief Justice has concurred with.