Transactions at the Land Registry are in a state of paralysis

Dear Editor,

Over three weeks ago it was publicly announced that Ms Sattaur, the Registrar of the Land Registry, had been sent off on administrative leave from her duties. My telephone enquiry at the Land Registry, Georgetown, the principal land registry, revealed that up to Friday 31st July, 2015 there was no person legally empowered to sign any document requiring official signature. Indeed, no effective business could be concluded there. Transactions are in a state of paralysis. Such a situation is without precedent. By your courtesy, Editor, may I explain the legal/administrative position.

Upon the purported appointment of Ms Sattaur as Registrar of Lands in early 2004, it was drawn in advance by this writer to the attention of the Chief Justice who is charged with administering the relevant oath of office required to be taken by the Registrar, Deputy Registrar and any assistant Registrar, and simultaneously drawn to the attention of the then Attorney General Mr Doodnauth Singh as confirmed by my letter to him of 6th February, 2004 that her appointment without more, would be illegal in the light of the provisions of section 7 (1) of the Land Registry Act, the wording of which I quote: “There shall be a Registrar of Lands and a Deputy Registrar of Lands, who shall be the persons for the time being holding the offices of Registrar of Deeds and Deputy Registrar of Deeds respectively.”

It was clear, therefore, that the purported appointment of any other category of person without the repeal or amendment of that section must be illegal. That was my view then expressed and which remains today. Amazingly, the Act too remains unaltered to this day which I propose as a reflection of the intransigence of the government of that day aided by the lassitude of the legal profession, quite a few of whose senior members aware of this defect continue to process to their obvious financial benefit transactions that might well be subject to question on account of the blatant illegality of the appointment of Ms Sattaur as Registrar.

Now, it occurs that the very illegality which they had comfortably ignored when in parliamentary opposition has been taken into account by the present administration by the fact that upon their summary dispatch of Ms Sattaur on leave they felt compelled to turn to the current Registrar of Deeds and Deputy Registrar of Deeds to perform an act of rescue of the system by diverting their energies and attention from their already demanding obligations under the Deeds Registry Act. Since such an emergency operation would be both physically and administratively oppressive, that form of rescue has sensibly been abandoned, resulting in the present departmental paralysis.

I can only hope that in response to these dire circumstances the Attorney General has prepared for emergency placement before Parliament the requisite amendment to the Land Registry Act to facilitate the legal appointment of some worthy persons to occupy the positions of Registrar and Deputy Registrar of Lands without further ado.

Yours faithfully,

Leon O Rockcliffe