Dear Editor,
The newspaper report in SN of 15th September, at page 9, I regard as closing the issue of the appointment of a Registrar, Ms Rosalie Robertson, an attorney-at-law of long standing. Although I had earlier joined the issue as a critic, I am quite satisfied with the result and think it is meet that we move on.
I am fortified in the above regard by the healthy approach of the new Registrar, principally on account of her calm businesslike approach and a consultative and communicative attitude with lawyers and her staff as she embarks upon delivering affirmative conclusion to long-delayed transactions, even as she leads her team into confronting the massive backlog of matters inherited.
We communicate often on technical issues and I am comforted and encouraged by her approach.
However, there is the significant issue yet to be determined by the Ministry of the Presidency, namely, that of ministerial responsibility for the Land Registry. In my earlier letter on this subject to the Minister of State which earned an instant res-ponse, I urged that the President see fit to entrust responsibility for the Land Registry to the (Attorney General) Minister of Legal Affairs as had obtained from the inception of Land Registration in the year 1960. This tradition had been varied only in November, 2006 when President Jadgeo retained that portfolio to himself for the next five years quite obviously for the narrow purpose of hands-on control whereby the Regis-trar of Lands should concentrate on the production of certificates of title in respect of government housing schemes. That position obtained apparently until the elections of May, 2015.
Now that the issue of appointment is deemed settled, the more urgent matter of ministerial responsibility, must be addressed. Remember, it is a fact that Ms Sattaur was able to flaunt being beyond reproof by law-yers or the general public on the basis that she answered only to the Presi-dential Secretariat. The ridiculous result was that there was no redress against her nor the resolution of any legal or administrative question arising from the operations of the Land Registry except through the Head of the Presidential Secretariat.
The challenge of those huge iron gates or the impenetrable telephone system remained an effective defence against complaint.
Surely the new administration could not fail to recognize the logic in restoring such responsibility to the Minister of Legal Affairs, which ministry, allied as it is with the Chambers of the Attorney General replete with resident legal personnel is much more disposed to entertain and resolve the day-to-day matters likely to arise from the business operations of the Land Registry.
Again, there is urgent need for the identification and appointment of a Deputy Registrar as required by section 7 of the Act. And let there be no doubt, the appointee must be a legal practitioner who, like the substantive Registrar must have the capability of interpreting the many legal provisions of the Act requiring such expertise and a like familiarity with the issues of intestate succession, joint property and sub-division of property. The urgency of this appointment is based on at least three vital considerations.
* That the operation of the Regis-try be not prejudiced by the prolonged absence of the Registrar from office for any considerable period.
* The flexibility in visiting and rendering service at the District Registries established in the counties of Berbice and Essequibo respectively.
* Liaison with the operations of the Deeds Registry which liaison has been too long in abeyance.
There is so much more to be done even before the operations of the Land Registry are transferred to their prospective new location at the former New Building Society Office at Avenue of the Republic and Com-merce Streets.
Yours faithfully,
Leon O Rockcliffe
