Attorney General Anil Nandlall SC on Tuesday night questioned retired Justice Courtney Abel’s reasoning in connecting Justice Gino Persaud’s reported US visa difficulties with his judicial decisions, saying the chronology of events alone could not establish such a link.
Speaking on his weekly Issues in the News programme, Nandlall said he still lacked sufficient information from either Justice Persaud or the United States to offer an informed opinion on the matter.
He nevertheless criticised remarks attributed to Abel, a former Belize High Court judge and head of the University of Guyana’s Department of Law, at a judicial conference in Jamaica.
“For a judge, a former judge, to make such a serious finding on the chronology of events is quite spectacular,” Nandlall said.
He argued that the sequence of two events could not, without further evidence, establish that one had caused the other.
Justice Persaud was unable to board a Miami-bound flight from Guyana on September 19 after airline representatives informed him that his US visa was “under review”. He had been travelling to Jamaica for the Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association annual conference. He subsequently reached the conference by another route.
In his presentation, Abel raised concerns about the implications of an unexplained foreign travel restriction on a serving judge who had delivered politically sensitive rulings.
However, he expressly acknowledged that allegations of Guyanese government involvement were unproved and that no reason for the US action had been publicly provided.
“There is chronology. There is context. There is concern. There is not yet proof. Suspicion is not evidence,” Abel had said.
He cited Persaud’s decisions in revenue proceedings involving the Mohamed family and the taxation of imported luxury vehicles, together with public criticism of aspects of those decisions by senior government figures. Abel’s concern was that unexplained restrictions could affect judicial independence, including by sending a message to other judges,
Nandlall said his position remained that he did not have enough information to explain Persaud’s visa difficulties. The previous week, he had denied that the Guyana government had played any role in the reported review.
The US Embassy has not publicly confirmed Justice Persaud’s visa status or the reason for his reported travel restriction.
Kiskadee Watch reported that Embassy Public Affairs Officer Jarrod Crockett declined to confirm or deny the account, citing the confidentiality of visa information.
Asked about the matter on September 23, US Ambassador Nicole Theriot gave a general explanation that a visa review could follow receipt of information causing US authorities to reconsider the holder’s eligibility. She said reviews took place within the US government and the embassy was not necessarily informed before a decision.
Theriot did not name Justice Persaud or confirm whether his visa was under review or had been revoked. Referring to the case reporters appeared to be asking about, she said the embassy had not been aware of the information.
Nandlall also drew attention on Tuesday night to a report on a new US visa restriction policy, questioning whether the chronological reasoning he attributed to Abel could be applied to that development.
The State Department announced measures on September 28 targeting foreign nationals and their immediate families whom it accused of undermining democratically elected governments through corruption or narco-trafficking. The announcement identified actions concerning Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru, and linked them to commitments under the Shield of the Americas initiative.
Discussion