Chief Justice quashes Jeffrey's rejection of medical council nominees
Chief Justice Desiree Bernard on Thursday quashed the decision of the Minister of Health, Dr Henry Jeffrey, to reject two nominees to the Medical Council of Guyana (MCG). The Chief Justice also granted an order prohibiting the minister from appointing other persons to the MCG without consulting the Guyana Medical Association (GMA). On October 30, 1998, the GMA submitted to Dr Jeffrey a list of six names--Dr Walter Ramsahoye, Dr Hughley Hanoman, Dr Frank Beckles, Dr Carl Hanoman, Dr Monica Sagala and Dr Hardat Persaud--for appointment to the MCG. On January 13, Dr Jeffrey rejected the names of Dr Ramsahoye and Dr Hughley Hanoman. He substituted these names with Dr Janice Imhoff and Dr Sattaur. On January 14, President of the GMA, Dr Carl Hanoman, wrote to the minister requesting the reasons for the rejection of the two names and the criteria and process used in selecting the others. According to the GMA president, no reply was ever received from the minister and through Senior Counsel Rex McKay, he subsequently filed an application for an order of certiorari to quash the decision and an order of mandamus directed to the minister commanding him to accept the nominations of the two names by the GMA. An application for an order of prohibition was also filed to prevent the minister from appointing to the MCG any other names which were not submitted by the GMA. In handing down her judgment, Chief Justice Bernard said that while she did not find the conduct of the respondent illegal, she however found it to be unfair and procedurally improper. She added that such conduct indicated interference in the internal affairs of the GMA. "If the minister was of the view that the nominees did not reflect what he had in mind he ought to have laid down criteria for selection initially and so inform the association," said the Chief Justice. She further noted that "he also failed to respond to the association's request for reasons for the rejection of two of their nominees thereby denying them an opportunity to convince him about the suitability of the two nominees who are competent and highly skilled members of the medical profession." In making some observations and recommendations, Chief Justice Bernard remarked that "every public official in the course of carrying out administrative duties is required to make decisions of a varied nature, and in large measure these officials do so effectively. However, in some instances errors are made which upon sober reflection and careful examination in a court of law, may be termed unfair, irrational or unreasonable." The Chief Justice added: "This in no way means that ulterior or dishonorable motives are ascribed to the decision-maker who may have conscientiously and sincerely sought to discharge his duties in the manner he deemed appropriate. It is the duty of the courts to ensure that administrative decisions are made fairly and reasonably within the boundaries of the statute from which the decision-maker derives his powers." The Chief Justice also recommended as was done in Jamaica 29 years ago, that Parliament should consider enacting legislation as has been done in Barbados, which requires statutory bodies and public officials to give reasons for decisions made. This would enable the whole process to become more transparent and would lead to greater efficiency. She added that this would remove the cloud of suspicion which often engulfs executive authority in the execution of its administrative functions. 
|