| A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) is contending that its leader, who also serves as leader of the combined political opposition, Brigadier (rt’d) David Granger, must be a person with an interest in any matter voted on by the National Assembly. “And taken to the High Court he must be heard in any such matter.”This position was articulated by the APNU Shadow Minister of Legal Affairs, Basil Williams, who yesterday responded to Chief Justice Ian Chang’s proposal to exclude Granger as a defendant in the High Court matter regarding the budget cuts.Shadow Minister of Legal Affairs,Johnny Pesky Red Sox Jersey, Basil Williams along with the party’s Public Relations Officer Malika Ramsey, during yesterday’s press engagement.Williams,Mookie Betts Red Sox Jersey, yesterday, during a press engagement held at the Office of the Leader of the Opposition said that the coalition finds the position strange, in light of the fact that Granger has been sued by Attorney General, Anil Nandlall, on numerous occasions since the beginning of the new Parliament for which he has been represented as a defendant.Williams said that the move is a strange action on the part of the Chief Justice given also that it has occurred “at a very late stage in the budget cut case, when Attorney General Nandlall,Allen Craig Red Sox Jersey, was expected to start leading his witness to prove his case.The Shadow Minister of Legal Affairs, reported to media operatives,Greg Maddux Cubs Jersey, that while there have been no formal arguments proffered by the opposition as yet on the matter, APNUs lawyers, inclusive of himself, Deborah Backer and Llewellyn John, have “indicated their disagreement with this proposal and are prepared to make legal submissions to support APNU’s position.”Williams said that if as the Chief Justice opines, that only the Speaker of the National Assembly, Raphael Trotman, can be sued, it means that the Speaker would represent the Leader of the majority of the Opposition,Xander Bogaerts Red Sox Jersey, Granger, in all court matters brought by the government.“In other words the Alliance for Change (AFC) would be representing in Court, the interest of APNU, if Brigadier (rtd) Granger is excluded by the Chief Justice Change…This is obviously a dubious position.”According to Williams, APNU lawyers will on the next hearing of the matter lead arguments in support of their position.Williams said he was unsure of the rationale behind the move by Chang,John Lackey Cubs Jersey, adding that Speaker of the House, Trotman, had from the inception of the very first case indicated that MPs cannot be sued.The Shadow Minister of Legal Affairs said that Chang at the time had said that they can be sued.“He will probably have to explain what he is saying now, given that MPs are afforded immunity from prosecution from matters arising in the House.”Williams further charged that even if Brigadier Granger had not been sued by the Attorney General “we would have made an application to be joined in the matter.”He said that APNU would have intervened in the matter because Brigadier Granger would have a legitimate interest in the subject matter before the court.“That is trite law, where a person has an interest that he has not been joined in an action he could intervene.” |
