Law books case: Courts must never be weaponised to settle personal scores – AG
- Home
- News
…notes there was never any evidence in the 1st place to charge him
Less than a week after winning a libel suit against his predecessor, Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister Anil Nandlall emphasised that no Government must ever be allowed to weaponise the courts to settle personal scores.
Over the weekend, Nandlall in a broadcast interview spoke about winning his lawsuit against his predecessor, former Attorney General Basil Williams, for libel. High Court Judge Priya Sewnarine-Beharry upheld Nandlall’s submissions that Williams defamed him by alleging that he stole law books and would be charged for larceny.
According to Nandlall, there was never any evidence in the first place that he committed any wrongdoing and in fact, he was charged by the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU) in 2017 based on a deficient file.
He also pointed out that a special audit commissioned by the former A Partnership for National Unity/Alliance For Change (APNU/AFC) Government into the allegations found no wrong doings on his part.
“There was no investigation done. I was charged and then investigations followed. Because the case remained in the Magistrates’ Court for several years. Because they had no statement. They had no evidence. They charged me on an empty file, based upon simply political directions,” Nandlall said.
“It was a big thing for me. I am a lawyer. I have never been accused of any form of dishonesty in my life. I have never been even charged with a traffic offence in my life. And here it is, I am being charged for larceny. Something that will tarnish my reputation and possibly affect my professional life.”
According to Nandlall, it is the principle that matters and now that he is vindicated, a message must be sent that the Judiciary cannot be used to settle personal scores. The Attorney General further expressed hope that Williams will appeal the matter, as is his right.
“I hope now that the ruling having been pronounced, it will bring closure to this matter… I had to retain lawyers. I spent a lot of time behind this matter. And for what? Simply because I was exposing the incompetence, the inefficiency, the corruption that was going on in the Government of the day. Because of that… you’re going to use the State machinery as a weapon against me?”
“The Judiciary, the criminal justice system must never be used as a weapon of vindictiveness in the political armoury of any Government or used to settle personal disputes. The justice system is to do justice between parties who have a genuine grievance. There was no genuine grievance here… and I wish that Basil Williams appeals the matter. Because I believe, honestly, the Judge should have granted more than $10 million,” Nandlall said.
The judgement was handed down by Judge Sewnarine-Beharry on Friday. In her ruling, the Justice awarded damages of $10 million to be paid by Williams. She also applied interest on the award at a rate of 6 per cent per annum from April 4, 2017, to June 29, 2023.
Additionally, the Justice ruled that interest of 4 per cent per annum would be applied after June 29, 2023, until the judgement was fully paid. Justice Sewnarine-Beharry also ruled that costs in the sum of $1.6 million must be paid by Williams to Nandlall by August 18, 2023.
According to the court documents, Nandlall commenced subscribing to Lexis Nexis (UK), publishers of the Commonwealth Law Reports, sometime in 2003, and to date still does; with the arrangement that individual Law Reports are shipped to him along with an invoice, which he pays upon receipt of each Report.
However, during discussions with the then President, Donald Ramotar, prior to his appointment as Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister in 2011, Nandlall requested that as a condition of his service, the Government of Guyana take over payment arrangements with Lexis Nexis (UK) in relation to the said Commonwealth Law Reports for the period during his tenure in office.
In her ruling, the Justice found that Williams failed to disprove the evidence Nandlall presented to the court that the Government of Guyana indeed came to an agreement with him, as part of his contract before he was first appointed Attorney General, to pay for his law books. (G3)
