Dear Editor,

It is with interest and concern that I respond to a letter prepared under the signature of Mr. Anil Nandlall, SC, MP, and captioned, “seven attempts to serve legal proceedings on Ms. Ferguson have proved futile.” (Stabroek News, September 14, 2021). May I remind Mr. Nandlall of Proverbs 16:13, “Good Leaders cultivate honest speech; they love advisors who tell them the TRUTH.” Unfortunately, I found every sentence and statement in Mr. Nandlall’s missive to be misleading, misguiding, and misinforming.
Editor, I have carefully examined every sentence, statement, and paragraph in Mr. Nandlall’s missive and wish to posit the following, which will give your readership a clear view of what is happening and to further state that Mr. Nandlall cannot stand to what Proverbs 16:13, so succinctly described “Good Leaders and being honest.”
In my examination of paragraph three (3) of Mr. Nandlall’s writings, this is what he said, “speaking for myself, contrary to the professed belief, I am unaware of Ms. Ferguson’s whereabouts or current address.” Unfortunately, I am taken aback by Mr. Nandlall’s statement and would say in my own words, what a strange and laughable response! If Mr. Nandlall is suffering from “temporary or convenient amnesia,” then I can offer him some assistance in regaining his memory. In January 2020, I brought a libel suit against Mr. Bharrat Jagdeo, where Mr. Nandlall appeared in person before Justice Gino Persaud on January 21, 2021, at 13:15hrs. As I did in my previous letter to you, Editor, I reiterate that Mr. Nandlall has in his possession documents exchanged between himself and my Attorney-at-Law, Mr. Lyndon Amsterdam, bearing my current address. Therefore, Mr. Nandlall is encouraged to engage his Clerk or Officers at his Private Office, in reviewing documents and providing him with the exact and accurate address.
In the paragraph under consideration, Mr. Nandlall further stated, “the truth is after I gave full instructions to my Attorneys-at-Law on the legal proceedings against Ms. Ferguson, I did not engage them on the issue until my attention was drawn to Ms. Ferguson’s letter.” In my honest opinion, I find such utterances convenient and should not go unnoticed. Lest we forget, it was the same Nandlall, who was initially involved in the libel suit between ‘Ferguson vs Jagdeo’; the Court granted me “Judgement” against Mr. Jagdeo.
Now, these questions must be asked:
1. Why have Mr. Nandlall’s attorneys failed to inform him of the “so-called” difficulty in service to me?
2. What has caused Mr. Nandlall not to show interest in this matter over the last two (2) months, since it was reported in an article carried online by News Room on June 22, 2021?
3. Is Mr. Nandlall serious about this matter being heard in the Court?
4. Can Mr. Nandlall give reason(s) for him, his attorneys, or the Marshal of court relying on the Official List of Electors (OLE) for my address, in an attempt to serve me?
Additionally, Mr. Nandlall stated, “… on parliamentary documents -Lot 19, North Road Bourda, Georgetown. Again, Mr. Nandlall, I can be of great assistance to you. The address Lot 19 is sub-divided; hence, many houses carry the same address. Therefore, let me and the readers know which one of the houses the marshal or marshals visited, the day(s) visits was/were made, date(s) of visits, time(s) of visits, and the name of the female who advised that “no one by the name of Annette Ferguson lives there.”
In the fourth paragraph of Mr. Nandlall’s letter, Editor, he referred to several other addresses, including a dwelling located in West Ruimveldt, to which they made attempts for services. He further quoted an EE Eccles, East Bank Demerara address and claimed that the marshal’s attempts to serve proved fruitless. Besides, he claimed, “his Attorneys-at-Law and do verily believe that the most recent attempt to serve Ms. Ferguson was on Friday 10th day of September at approximately 10:00hrs.” Editor, I will contend and contest at any trial the following:
1. I do not nor never dwelled at any house in West Ruimveldt.
2. That at no time on Friday, September 10, 2021, a marshal or marshals visited my residence in Eccles at 10:00hrs; since I was at home and did not hear anyone call, I did not see anyone at my gates, nor my neighbors called to say someone is/was at my gate.
In the last sentence of the fourth paragraph of Mr. Nandlall’s letter, he stated, “it is indeed more than passing strange that her letter appeared in the newspaper the very next day.” Since Mr. Nandlall has failed to explain, Editor, kindly allow me to provide him with TRUTH and FACTS I will contend or contest at any trial. The Editors at the following publications: Stabroek News, Kaieteur News, and Village Voice, were sent copies of the letter on Thursday, September 9, 2021, Stabroek News at 21:50hrs; Kaieteur News at 21:53hrs and Village Voice at 21:59hrs respectively, and they were published on Saturday, September 11, 2021.
Nandlall, since there is difficulty locating me, you are advised to engage the editors and sub-editors of Guyana Times, knowledgeable of my address. You are aware of the pending matter before the High Court brought by me, Annette Ferguson, against Guyana Times, for the false December 11, 2019, article “Opposition calls out Minister for lying about house lots application,” complemented with an aerial depiction of my property.
Also, you can engage the Attorney-at-Law, who took over the case (Ferguson vs Jagdeo) from you. They, too, may assist you with my address. They can TRUTHFULLY tell you whether my address is Lot 19, North Road, Bourda, Georgetown.
Not surprisingly, Nandlal’s penultimate paragraph expressed surprise regarding my knowledge of Article 172 (4) of the Constitution of Guyana, that “No process issued by any court in the exercise of its civil jurisdiction shall be served or executed within the precincts of the National Assembly while the Assembly is sitting or through the Speaker, Clerk, or any officer of the Assembly.”
Editor, the Oxford Language Dictionary has defined a precinct as “the area within walls or perceived boundaries of a particular building or place.” Now that I have provided an appropriate definition for a precinct, I consider that Mr. Nandlall is trying to make a fool of me or believes people are stupid! I now put the following questions to Mr. Nandlall:
1. Can the entry to the Arthur Chung Conference Centre where the National Assembly currently meets be considered a “precinct”?
2. Can the exit from the Arthur Chung Conference Centre where the National Assembly currently meets be considered a “precinct”?
3. Can we consider the area designated for parking in the Arthur Chung Conference Centre compound a “precinct”?
While I wait in high anticipation for Mr. Nandlall’s responses to answers for (1-3) above, as a rational and reasonable thinker, in my considered judgment, those areas do not fit into the definition of “precinct”. Editor, as stated in my letter to you dated September 9, 2021, where I was pellucid, “there were several sittings of the National Assembly; after the publication of the article on June 22, 2021, where I attended on all occasions.”
Therefore, Mr. Nandlall should have decided with his attorneys to serve me on entry, exit, or in the parking lot at the Arthur Chung Conference Centre. He is also aware of the Assembly’s schedule; hence, the marshal or marshal should have been there before the commencement of the sittings to effect service on me.
Editor, I must inform Mr. Nandlall that though I am not legally trained, I can interpret, analyze, and rationalize things for myself. If Mr. Nandlall is unaware of my academic and professional training, it will serve him well to know that I am a graduate from several renowned universities and a holder of several diplomas and degrees in several disciplines. He should also know that I am no “fool” nor I am “mentally retarded”.
Editor, there seems to be a devious and surreptitious means to go behind my back to claim judgment due to my unwillingness to accept service or avoidance of service. However, I am repeating what I mentioned in my letter on September 9, 2021, to Mr. Nandalall, “I have made myself available to be served and I am ready to respond to the claims brought against me.” Further, I will be available, as I was previously. Let me know, DATE, DAY, TIME, and PLACE!
In closing, I wish to caution Mr. Nandlall that the shenanigans being attempted will not succeed. It is my fervent hope and belief that you are not inclined to mislead, misguide or misinform the Justices of the Supreme Court of Judicature.

MUST READ  Questions on Irfaan’s Bogus Education Certificates

Yours in service,

Ms. Annette Ferguson
Member of Parliament – APNU+AFC


Leave a Reply