Many abuses of the law in Rodney case — Eusi Kwayana — Opinion

Many abuses of the law in Rodney case

September 1, 2026·2 min read

Dear Editor,

April 13, 2021 was a notable day in Guyana’s court sessions. On that day, the Court of Appeal upheld Donald Rodney’s appeal against his conviction for possession of an explosive device in 1982.^[1] Needless to say, the length of time almost an age imposed on the appellant as waiting time amounts to an obscenity.

Guyana had become notorious in Caribbean legal practice because its judiciary was headed by two women who because of the nature of their societies had found themselves acting as chief justice and chancellor of judiciary respectively for over 5 years. On at least one occasion when asked to explain the need for the prolonged acting in these positions the Vice President told his weekly press conference that “before there could be permanent appointments to these positions, the track record of the post holders (the chief justice and the chancellor of the judiciary)” had to be examined by the President.^[2]

The Guyana Constitution requires agreement by the President and the leader of the opposition for naming the Chief Justice and the Chancellor of the Judiciary. The Chancellor of the Judiciary in the trials following the now famous “no confidence” motion, that brought the coalition government to an end in August 2020^[3] had committed a professional blunder and was recently replaced by the Chief Justice.

It still was not easy for Donald Rodney to win his appeal against his conviction of 40 years ago though he should have on the basis of legal theory as old as the law itself. First, Donald Rodney had to address the purported dismissal of his appeal by a Full Court in 2010^[4], which disbelievingly heard his appeal, though Rodney had signed no papers and had no knowledge of an appeal to it (i.e. the Full Court). The Court of Appeal also ruled that the Full Court had no jurisdiction to hear an appeal in Rodney’s case, much less dismiss it. Some of the trials and prosecutions deemed to be political have resulted in severe abuse of the Common Law in which it has always been clear that “possession” means owning with the knowledge of the possessor (person accused).

This comment is being written because in her summing up of the proceedings, the Chancellor of the judiciary referred to the testimony in the appeal trial here referred to and quoted the DPP as saying, “there was nothing before the magistrate to justify the conviction of Donald Rodney”. The Chancellor added “it is a pity that this concession was not made much earlier.” The episode of this case includes many abuses of the law.

Yours sincerely,
Eusi Kwayana

References

BREAKING: Guyana Court of Appeal sets aside explosives conviction, sentence of Donald Rodney – Demerara Waves Online News- Guyana — demerarawaves.com ↩
Substantive Chancellor, Chief Justice appointments: President Ali stands firm on judicial independence - Guyana Times — guyanatimesgy.com ↩
Granger acknowledges ‘declaration’, signals election petition - Stabroek News — www.stabroeknews.com ↩
Donald Rodney petitions Appeal Court to probe Full Court action - Stabroek News — www.stabroeknews.com ↩

BREAKING: Guyana Court of Appeal sets aside explosives conviction, sentence of Donald Rodney – Demerara Waves Online News- Guyana

demerarawaves.com · 2021-04-13

BREAKING: Guyana Court of Appeal sets aside explosives conviction, sentence of Donald Rodney – Demerara Waves Online News- Guyana # BREAKING: Guyana Court of Appeal sets aside explosives conviction, sentence of Donald Rodney by Denis Chabrol Tuesday, 13 April 2021, 14:39 Donald Rodney ... The Guyana Court of Appeal on Tuesday set aside the conviction and 18-month sentence for possession of explosives against Donald Rodney- –the brother of Guyanese politician and historian Dr. Walter Rodney who was killed in a bomb blast 40 years ago. ... “We will allow the appeal and set aside the conviction and sentence and a written decision will be following shortly,” said Chancellor of the Judiciary Yonette Cummings after hearing further submissions from the Director Public Prosecutions Shalimar Hack and Defence Lawyer Sanjeev Datadin. ... The DPP restated that there was no evidence that Donald Rodney had been in possession of explosives. ... “The defendant had possession of a walkie-talkie,” said the DPP, adding that he was knowingly in possession of that electronic communication device but “we don’t have sufficient evidence to prove that he was in possession of an explosive.” ... Donald was on bail after appealing the Magistrates Court sentence of 18 months imprisonment for possession of explosives on June 13, 1980 when he had collected a bag with a walkie-talkie from then Guyana Defence Force (GDF) electronics expert Sergeant Gregory 4141. ... The DPP said even if the Guyana Court of Appeal finds that there was sufficient evidence to prove that Donald Rodney had been in possession of explosives, the court needs to find that the case has been going on for 30 to 40 years in violation of the constitutional right to fair hearing within reasonable time. ... “We find that this is an overly appropriate case to have the conviction set aside,” the DPP said. “We have no objection to the appeal against the conviction and consequently if the appeal of the conviction is annulled, then the sentence goes,” she said.

Source

Many abuses of the law in Rodney case in Kaieteur News, September 1, 2026

Substantive Chancellor, Chief Justice appointments: President Ali stands firm on judicial independence - Guyana Times

guyanatimesgy.com · 2025-01-01

#### President Irfaan Ali has clarified that the overturning of political cases by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) especially those from the Court of Appeal, has no bearing on the appointment of the acting Chief Justice Roxane George, SC and acting Chancellor of the Judiciary, Justice Yonette Cummings-Edwards. Answering a question asked about concerns raised on the issue, during his end of Year press conference on Tuesday, President Ali emphasised the independence of the Judiciary and the processes in place for judicial review and accountability. The President acknowledged that several cases decided by the local Appeal Court were overturned by the CCJ, but he stressed this as a natural course of judicial procedure. “That is why you have superior courts,” he stated, underscoring the importance of an independent Judiciary system where decisions are tested at various levels. ... Court and the Appeal Court to be examined and ruled upon by higher courts. He pointed out instances where the CCJ upheld High Court rulings, while also overturning others from the Appeal Court. “This has no impact on our decision-making as a Government. It speaks to the judicial process itself and what happens at the front level of the Judiciary. And that is why the Judiciary is made up of superior courts, so that decisions can be tested,” he explained. He urged the Judiciary to continuously analyse the reasons behind any high rate of overturned decisions to maintain its credibility and uphold public confidence. The President also highlighted progress within the Judiciary, such as improved case clearance rates, demonstrating that the system is evolving positively. Meanwhile, responding to concerns about the acting roles of the current Chancellor and Chief Justice, President Ali acknowledged the situation but affirmed that efforts are underway to address it. “We do have a Chancellor and Chief Justice acting, just as we had an acting Commissioner of Police before his recent confirmation…So, as President, the issue of the Chancellor and Chief Justice is one that is being continuously looked at,” he said. The Head of State emphasised that the appointment process for these crucial positions requires careful consideration and adherence to established procedures. “As President, I will follow the process, all the circumstances that exist to ensure that we have the Chancellor and Chief Justice that would continue to take the Judiciary into a place that all of us will be proud of. All of the region will be proud of.” ... #### President Ali reiterated his commitment to resolving the issue of acting appointments in the Judiciary. While he did not provide a specific timeline, he assured that the matter remains a priority for his administration. The last substantive appointments for Chancellor of the Judiciary and Chief Justice occurred during the late 1990s. Justice Désirée Bernard served as the first female Chancellor of the Judiciary from 2001 to 2005 before her elevation to the CCJ. The Constitution mandates that the President and the Leader of the Opposition must agree on the appointments of the Chancellor and Chief Justice. However, political divisions have repeatedly stalled this process, leaving the positions to be filled in an acting capacity for over two decades. Justice Yonette Cummings-Edwards has been serving as acting Chancellor since 2017, while Justice Roxane George was appointed acting Chief Justice in the same year. Calls for substantive appointments have been a recurring demand from legal professionals, civil society groups, and international organisations, who argue that the long-standing acting appointments undermine the stability and perception of the Judiciary’s independence. Efforts to resolve the impasse have been sporadic, with varying degrees of progress made under different administrations. President Ali’s recent remarks signal continued recognition of the issue, though concrete resolutions remain pending. (G1)

Granger acknowledges ‘declaration’, signals election petition - Stabroek News

www.stabroeknews.com · 2020-08-03

August 3, 2020 In one of his last official acts before demitting office, President David Granger yesterday recognised the declaration by the Chair of GECOM, Justice (ret’d) Claudette Singh of the recount results which showed a victory for the opposition PPP/C at the March 2nd polls and he also signalled that an election petition was in the offing. ... For months, Granger’s government had contended that the recount results did not provide an adequate basis for the declaration despite not producing evidence to substantiate this. ... The months of defiance ended yesterday when the GECOM Chair finally declared the result bringing an end to the five-month contestation. ... Using single quotation marks on the word declaration to likely symbolise that while he respected the declaration he had reservations about it, Granger said: “Guyanese, I have seen the ‘declaration’ issued by the Chairman of the Elections Commission, Justice (Ret’d) Claudette Singh, SC, CCH, in accordance with the Constitution of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana (at Article 177 (2)), on 2nd August ... 2020. ... “I have stated, repeatedly, from the start of the electoral process, that the A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) Coalition would respect the lawful ‘declaration’ of the Elections Commission. I have never altered this position and I do now acknowledge the ‘declaration.’ ... “The APNU+AFC Coalition respects the lawful consequences of the ‘declaration’ as announced by the Chairman of the Elections Commission. I maintain that the Report ordered by the Court and presented to the Commission contains significant anomalies and irregularities. ... Earlier in the day, Granger had stated that GECOM had to proceed with the declaration of results. He made this statement in a Ministry of the Presidency (MoTP) release following a call from Singh for him to have a conversation with PPP General Secretary Bharrat Jagdeo on “the way forward”. Singh had taken the initiative after the government-appointed members of GECOM had made this suggestion at a meeting of the commission yesterday morning. The MoTP release said that Granger explained to Singh that he had no objection to speaking with Jagdeo but as far as a proposed declaration is concerned, “he recognised that the Commission has a legal obligation as a result of the recent ruling of the Court of Appeal, to proceed with a declaration. ... “President Granger said that notwithstanding that declaration, the APNU+ AFC coalition maintains that the anomalies and irregularities which have been uncovered during the recount process cannot be accepted and will form the grounds for an election petition”.

Donald Rodney petitions Appeal Court to probe Full Court action - Stabroek News

www.stabroeknews.com · 2019-12-13

December 13, 2019 Donald Rodney has petitioned the Court of Appeal (CoA) to investigate what he has called a farcical appeal of his 1982 conviction for possession of explosives. ... Speaking to Stabroek News yesterday, Rodney explained that the petition was aimed at prompting an investigation into a Full Court appeal of his conviction, which was improperly made, and eventually dismissed. ... The appeal to the Full Court was dismissed in default of Rodney’s and his attorney-at-law’s attendance, while the appeal to the CoA, which Rodney wants to proceed with, was filed in 1982. He has said that it was not filed by him. ... Donald Rodney had successfully appealed the Full Court’s dismissal of the ‘farcical appeal’ in the CoA before of acting Chief Justice Roxane George and Justices of Appeal Rishi Persaud and Dawn Gregory. During the hearing of the notice of appeal, which was treated as the substantive appeal, the panel, as well as counsel Dionne McCammon, who represents the state through the Chambers of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), agreed that in light of the indictable nature of the offence Rodney was charged with committing, it was the Court of Appeal as opposed to the Full Court, which had jurisdiction to hear the appeal. ... As a result, acting Chief Justice George had said that Rodney’s substantive appeal to his conviction, filed before the Court of Appeal since 1982, will now be allowed to take its normal course. ... was then given 14 days to file his grounds of appeal. The bail he was granted in 1982 was held to still be in place. ... However, Rodney says that he has checked with the CoA on several occasions since, and has been told that a date has not been fixed for hearing. He said that an employee of the CoA’s registry had said that the court was not satisfied with the amount of documents which had been found thus far, and was looking for additional documents. Rodney, however, says that he was able to acquire many of the documents which pertain to this matter, and sees no reason why an institution of the state would have a more difficult time than a citizen.