Govt can spend as it sees fitIn response to the order which seeks to restrict the government from making any disbursements fromAttorney GeneralAnil Nandlallthe recently acquired US$32.16M Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) loan, Attorney General, (AG) Anil Nandlall has said that the High Court has no power or jurisdiction, whatsoever, to interfere with the Executive expenditure of these funds unless it is in violation of the Constitution.The legal challenge was issued against the government by the APNU Shadow Minister of Finance Carl Greenidge.Greenidge filed the proceedings following an announcement that Government had signed loan agreements with President of the IDB, Luis Alberto Moreno,Sven Bender Dortmund Jersey, for US$32.16M.The agreements comprise two loans targeting police and prison initiatives as well as the environmental management sectors-–?US$15M for the Citizen Security Strengthening Project, and US$17.16M in support of policy reforms in the sector.But Greenidge filed the action to prevent the government from using the monies over concerns of misuse in regards to the amounts.An order was subsequently handed down in the High Court blocking the government from making any disbursements. The order is to remain in force until determination by the courtThe matter is ongoing before the Chief Justice (Ag),Loris Karius Liverpool Jersey, Ian Chang.? Following yesterday’s proceedings,Kelechi Iheanacho Jersey, a statement was issued by the Attorney General.He described the challenge by Greenidge as a public gimmick. “It is frivolous and wholly unwarranted.” Nandlall said that monies were deposited in the Consolidated Fund three weeks before the institution of the proceedings.“It is now trite and settled law that once monies are in the Consolidated Fund they can only be disbursed in accordance with provisions of the Constitution and the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act 2003.”The AG said that in the circumstances the Chief Justice agreed that the Court has no power or jurisdiction whatsoever to interfere with the Executive’s expenditure of these funds expect in violation the Constitution or the law.Nandlall further said that it is routine practice that the proceeds of the loan having been paid into the Consolidated Fund,Tom Carroll Jersey UK, is no longer IDB money.It forms part of the pool of resources indistinguishable from other receipts,Andrea Bertolacci Jersey, including tax and non-tax revenue.He claimed that there is no requirement in law, or emerging from the terms and conditions of the Loan Contract, that the proceeds of the loan be separately identified when withdrawn from the Consolidated Fund.Nandlall argued that in light of the circumstance “Any one month funds are withdrawn and spent from the Consolidated Fund to meet the operations of Government, without any identification being made of the original source of those Funds.”In affidavit in response he claims that the High Court will violate the constitutional doctrine of the separation of powers if the Court were to grant any orders regarding or restricting the withdrawal of the specific proceeds of the loanBut Chartered Accountant and Attorney -at- Law Christopher Ram who was holding for Greenidge’s Attorney Roysdale Forde, during yesterday’s proceeding,Karim Rekik Netherlands Jersey, noted that it is improper for the AG to issue such a statement.Ram accused Nandlall of misrepresenting what transpired during the proceeding.Ram said that Greenidge’s attorney was granted leave to file an Affidavit in reply to AG’s claims.“Until such time the order to prevent government from spending the monies acquired under the loan agreement still stands,” Ram said.The case has been adjourned until April 23.