Cabinet condemns move to jail minister
-asks courts to protect executive from ‘partisan’ action
The government yesterday condemned the move to jail Finance Minister Winston Jordan for failing to make a court-ordered payment of US$2 million to Dipcon Construction and appealed to the courts to “protect the Executive” from what it dubbed “vexatious and partisan action.”
“Cabinet condemns the unprecedented and scurrilous attack on a serving Minister of Government by seeking to imprison him in his private capacity,” Cabinet said in a statement released by the Ministry of the Presidency. The statement said Cabinet endorsed the action taken by President David Granger to grant respite to exempt Jordan from punishment in his private capacity for judgments incurred prior to his appointment as minister.
The president on Monday invoked his power under Article 188(1) (b) of the Constitution to grant Jordan, both in his personal capacity and in his capacity as minister, “respite of the execution of the punishment until all appeals and remedies available to him and the state have been exhausted.”
Article 188 (1) (b) of the constitution says that the president may “grant to any person a respite, either indefinite or for a specified period, of the execution of any punishment imposed on that person for such an offence.”
The decision coincided with AttorneyGeneral Basil Williams appealing the Full Court’s decision to reject a stay requested by Jordan of the order that he be jailed for contempt for not paying Dipcon the money.
However, Williams yesterday withdrew the appeal application from the Guyana Court of Appeal. Attorney for the Trinidad-based Dipcon, Timothy Jonas, confirmed to Stabroek News yesterday that Williams withdrew the appeal. It is unclear what prompted the move by Williams and what will be the implication given that the president’s reprieve stipulated that the grant of respite would remain in effect “until all appeals and remedies” available to him and the state have been exhausted.
Repeated efforts to contact Williams for comment proved futile.
While Parliament has approved finances so that the judgment could be honoured, no money has been paid over to the construction company.
Upholding a ruling handed down by High Court judge Priya SewnarineBeharry late last month, the Full Court on Friday rejected Jordan’s request for a stay of the judge’s ruling that he pay over the money no later than July 8th or face 21 days in jail for contempt.
Justices Diana Insanally and Simone Morris-Ramlall, who presided over the Full Court hearing, had said they were of the view that Jordan’s application had no merit.
As a matter of fact, the judges said they found Justice Sewnarine-Beharry’s judgment committing Jordan to jail for contempt for failure to pay, to have been proper as well as her subsequent refusal to stay her order.
It has always been Jonas’ position that there could have been no appeal as one could not appeal an interlocutory decision of the Full Court to the Court of Appeal.
Jonas had made it clear that Jordan would become liable for a warrant of arrest as of yesterday.
Following a string of failed attempts to recover the money, despite previous court orders, Dipcon filed contempt proceedings for non-payment against Jordan in his personal capacity.
Jordan has maintained that he ought not to be held personally responsible for government’s failure to pay.
Williams has previously contended that since Jordan was a minister of government, the court could not make a coercive order against him and that it had no jurisdiction to make such orders against the government.
His position has been that Dipcon’s application for the contempt of court order against Jordan was “misconceived” and amounted to an abuse of process.
Jonas had, however, maintained that while a court indeed has no jurisdiction to issue coercive orders against the government, Jordan was not the government, but a mere “individual,” against whom the contempt proceedings were mounted.
It is Jordan who is in “criminal contempt,” for not giving effect to Justice Rishi Persaud’s October 21st, 2015 judgment, Jonas has emphasised.
Counsel had said that ministers of government are not the state and could be held in contempt.
Williams, however, took issue with this position, arguing that in his capacity as Minister of Finance, Jordan fell under the umbrella of the government.
Both the Guyana Court of Appeal and the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) had upheld Justice Persaud’s October 21st, 2015 ruling.
Apart from these rulings, by way of action instituted on December 8th, 2017, Dipcon applied to the Court and on March 1st, 2018, obtained an order of mandamus issued by the Chief Justice (CJ) directing that the money be paid over to Dipcon.