AG finally activates JRA, in keeping with CJ’s order
Following weeks of delay, Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Basil Williams has finally activated the Judicial Review Act in keeping with the original order of Chief Justice (ag) Roxane George.
The JRA was enacted on Monday after the AG issued a commencement in the Official Gazette making the Act effective from July 31, the date originally set by the Chief Justice.
A previous commencement order signed by the AG was published in the Official Gazette on August 15, 2018. That order had given January 1, 2019, as the date for the enactment of the JRA, which was essentially not in compliance with the court’s ruling. As a result, Williams was facing Contempt of Court proceedings filed by Attorneyat-law and former Attorney General, Anil Nandlall.
Last year, Nandlall had previously filed legal proceeding to compel the current Attorney General to bring into operation the JRA of 2010. The JRA is an area of public law which is designed to specifically assist members of the public in challenging acts committed against them by State officials, including Government Ministers.
The Act was passed in 2010 but was scheduled to be enacted after the new High Court rules/Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) were in place. The new High Court rules came into being in 2017.
As a result, the Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs is lawfully tasked with bringing the Act into effect by publishing an order signed by him in the Official Gazette. However, Williams was accused of delaying on the matter. He has since faced a series of court actions, one which resulted in an order by the Chief Justice to enact the JRA by July 31, last.
In her ruling in May, Chief Justice George noted that the JRA contained the procedures by which remedies can be accessed under the Act; one is a complement to the other. Justice George took into consideration information gathered from Hansard (records of Parliament) which evidenced the fact that the JRA was unanimously passed by the House and was endorsed by the applicant (Nandlall) and the respondent (Williams) in the House.
Further, the Judge took into consideration Williams’ submission that the Court would be breaching the separation of powers doctrine if it were to mingle in legislative and executive affairs.
Justice George made it clear that the JRA had been assented to already, which meant it had passed the stage of the legislative arm. She noted, too, that in a situation where the Minister failed to perform his duty, the Court is empowered to compel the said Minister to do so.
The Court cited a number of legal authorities to support the conclusions reached. The matter was taken to the Appeal Court, which later decided in favour of the CJ ruling to operationalise the JRA.
(Kaieteur News)