NRF’s Terrence Campbell seeks injunction against oil money spending in face of no accountability

Last Updated on Friday, 21 February 2025, 23:24 by Writer

Opposition representative on the Natural Resource Fund’s (NRF) Investment Committee, Terrence Campbell on Thursday asked the High Court to block government from spending oil revenues unless details are provided about how the money would be spent and that the expenditures are accounted for in separate reports.

The City businessman hopes that the Court orders a permanent or interim order pending the outcome of the case to prohibit the Senior Minister in the Office of the President with responsibility for Finance from laying in the National Assembly any financial papers or documents seeking consideration and approval of proposed and/or intended withdrawals from the Fund without simultaneously laying in the National Assembly such statements and/or documents detailing the purpose and/or use of such withdrawals from the Fund to finance any further withdrawals from the Fund demonstrating compliance with Section 16(2) of the 2021 NRF Act.

Also such an order requires all financial papers seeking approval for withdrawals to include specific and comprehensive justification of intended use, and mandates monthly reporting to the National Assembly on the status and usage of withdrawn funds.

The High Court is also being asked to order that all financial papers seeking approval for withdrawals to include specific monthly and reporting comprehensive to the National justification Assembly of intended on the use, status and usage including of withdrawn interim funds.

An injunction or such other Order as may be appropriate is also being sought to restrain the Senior Minister of Finance in the office of the President with the responsibility for finance and the Attorney General from authorising or permitting, and/or utilising any withdrawals from the Natural Resource Fund for purposes other than those explicitly permitted under Section 16(2) of the Act.

Mr Campbell wants the High Court to declare, among other things, that all NRF withdrawals shall be subject to prior scrutiny and approval by the National Assembly, with comprehensive disclosure of intended purposes and supported by detailed documentation demonstrating strict compliance with those purposes, and complete and transparent disclosure of the intended purpose and use of all proposed withdrawals from the Fund.

Through his lawyers, Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde and Seenath Jairam, the city businessman said the Attorney General and the Minister with Responsibility for Finance in the Office 0f the President failed to account or to account properly for NRF withdrawals totalling US$1,404,458,130 from 2022 to 2024.

“There has been no evidence that these withdrawals align with Section 16(2) of the 2021 NRF Act for their permitted/legitimate purposes. The absence of justification for these withdrawals violates constitutional and statutory financial accountability obligations/principles binding upon the respondents,” the court papers state. Section 16(2) of the Act states that all withdrawals from the Fund shall be used only to finance national development priorities including any initiative aimed at realising an inclusive green economy and essential projects that are directly related to ameliorating the effect of a major natural disaster.

Further, Mr Campbell says in court papers seen by Demerara Waves Online News that the National Estimates for 2025 demonstrate a current expenditure deficit of $46,016 million and $75,929 million for the fiscal years 2024 and 2025 respectively, indicating that NRF monies are “being used to finance regular government operations rather than the statutorily mandated purposes.”

He is also seeking a declaration that Guyana’s Constitution and the NRF Act mandate complete disclosure of the intended purpose and use of all NRF withdrawals, comprehensive documentation justifying how each withdrawal aligns with the permitted statutory purposes, clear and verifiable separation and tracking of funds withdrawn from the Fund when transferred to the Consolidated Fund, and regular reporting to the National Assembly on the actual usage of withdrawn funds.

Other declarations being sought are that the commingling/amalgamation of the funds withdrawn from the Fund together with the expenditure charged on the Consolidated Fund and moneys authorised by an Appropriation Act is legally impermissible and/or a breach of Article 217 (3) and (4) of the Constitution and/or a perversity of the conjoint effect of Article 217 of the Constitution and Section 16 (2) of the 2021 Act.