High Court rules against PNCR in dispute over state-owned building in Lethem

The High Court has ruled that the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) had no legal right to remain in a building owned by the State in Lethem, adding that its removal did not amount to trespass or a violation of its constitutional rights.

The PNCR had moved to the Court after it was removed from the building in March 2023 after years of occupation. The building had served as the party’s regional headquarters since the 1970s.

In the case brought against the Attorney General, the Regional Democratic Council and Contractor, Dale Kennedy, the opposition party argued that Regional Executive Officer Karl Singh, together with the contractor and members of the Police Force entered the building without its permission, and demolished parts of the structure, and later blocked the party from occupying the building.

However, the Attorney General, who was among the respondents, argued that the property belongs to the State. It was also argued that the PNCR had occupied the building without the permission of the State, after being served with notices to vacate by the REO.

In a statement today, the Attorney General Chambers said the High Court delivered its ruling on August 24.

It said the Court found that the land and building belonged to the State and were vested in the RDC, adding that the PNCR could not produce any lease, title document, or other proof of ownership.

The AG Chambers said the Court also found that the party’s decades-long occupation began in the 1970s and that its presence there was best understood as permission granted by the State rather than a legal right to the property.

It said the Court also ruled that the RDC had given the PNCR ample notice to vacate — starting in November 2021 with a final deadline in January 2023. It was not until March 2023, that the PNCR was removed.

“Because the PNCR’s right to occupy the building had already been lawfully withdrawn, the Court held that the entry and recovery of the premises did not constitute trespass. The judge similarly rejected the PNCR’s claims that its goods had been unlawfully converted, finding that the property removed from the building was inventoried and stored by the RDC and remained available for collection,” the Chamber said.

According to the Attorney General’s Chambers, the Court ruled that the PNCR’s Constitutional right was not violated, adding that the government’s actions amounted to lawful enforcement of its property rights rather than discrimination or an unconstitutional taking.

As a result, the case was dismissed and the PNCR was ordered to pay costs in the sum of $300,000.

The PNCR was represented by Attorney Darren Wade, who has since indicated that he intends to appeal the ruling.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login