Attorney for Guyana's lawmaker concerned over Friday's sitting of the National Assembly

ATTORNEYS representing Guyanese lawmaker Charrandass Persaud have complained to that country’s highest appellate court – the Trinidad-based Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) – that a proposed sitting of the National Assembly on Friday should not take place.

The issue was raised earlier this morning at a case management sitting at the CCJ.

Persaud and the Opposition People’s Progressive Party (PPP) have challenged Guyana’s appellate court ruling which invalidated December’s no-confidence vote against the ruling coalition government.

According to Persaud’s attorney, Sanjeev Datadin, they have learned from press reports of a sitting of the National Assembly on Friday to pass legislation relating finance, and specifically to companies in the oil and gas sector.

He said Friday’s sitting should be refrained from having regards to the implications of the December 21 no-confidence vote, admitting that while an application had not been filed by his legal team, he chose to raise it in the event the Attorney General would give an undertaking.

He also hinted that an urgent application to prevent the sitting from taking place would be filed. In response, CCJ president Justice Adrian Saunders said the court preferred not to comment on the issue raised unless there was an application before the court.

The CCJ has set May 10 for the hearing of the consolidated challenges which seeks to have the appellate court’s ruling thrown out.

In December, Persaud, who was a member from President David Granger’s APNU-AFC coalition, sided with the opposition.

The motion was appealed and Guyana’s Court of Appeal, in a majority ruling, held that there was a need for an absolute majority of 34 votes for the no-confidence motion to be passed, and not the 33 votes it received in December.

By a majority of two to one, the appellate court judges ruled that the no-confidence motion was not passed.

In their application, Persaud and the PPP are seeking to restore the decision of the acting Chief Justice on January 31, which validated the no-confidence vote, a declaration that the vote was validly passed by a majority of all elected members of the National Assembly and that 33 votes constituted a majority of all elected members of the National Assembly.

They contend by section 106(6) of the Constitution of Guyana, the Cabinet, including the president, is required to resign if the Government is defeated on the vote of a majority of all elected members of the assembly on a vote of no- confidence.

They say the assembly is comprised of 65 elected members and on December 21, last year, when 33 members voted in favour of the motion and 32 against, the speaker declared the motion passed.

They also contend that the Government was required to hold an election in three months, on or before March 22.

Persaud, meanwhile, is also challenging the contention that he was ineligible to vote because he held dual citizenship, while there is a separate challenge against the decision by Granger to appoint Justice James Patterson as chairman to the Guyana Elections Commission (GEOCOM) on the basis that he was not qualified for appointment.