- AG tells court that immunity is conferred on President
ATTORNEY General Mr. Doodnauth Singh, S.C., yesterday told Constitutional judge, William Ramlal that the constitutional case before him that alleged the President had taken action as Minister to suspend Sharma Channel 6 TV licence for infringement, had no chance of succeeding.
Because he explained the President had immunity conferred on him and as such could not be taken to the Criminal or the Civil Court for any alleged wrongdoing.

The Attorney General, who is the Respondent in a constitutional case brought by Channel 6 T.V. boss C.N. Sharma against the Government for licence infringement, was addressing the Court on a preliminary point.

The Attorney General referred to the Guyana Constitution during the regime of Prime Minister Linden Forbes Sampson Burnham in which arrangements were made to deal with misconduct of the Head of State.

The A.G. made it clear that while Prerogative Writs and Writs of Certiorari cannot be brought against a head of State in relation to the Constitution, he pointed out that the mechanism to challenge a decision of the President is contained in Article 180.

But according to him, you will have to activate a process in Parliament. The courts, he said, have no jurisdiction because of the provisions of Article 182 which confers immunity on the President when he is performing functions of office.

He quoted similar constitutional provisions which exist in the constitutions of Trinidad & Tobago, Ghana and Sri Lanka.

Mr. Nigel Hughes, in reply, disagreed that the action taken was against the President, but declared it was against the Attorney General who was representing the Minister on whose behalf the President was acting.

The Judge ordered the Attorney General to put his submissions in writing within three days and give the other side three days to respond.

They are to return to Court on Wednesday April 23 for a continuation of the matter.