Nurses to decide on lawsuit against Health Minister
THE Registered Nurses Association (TTRNA) and two other nursing bodies have until September to decide if they will withdraw their lawsuit against the Health Minister over a previous appointment he made to the Nursing Council.
Justice Devindra Rampersad gave the directive in a ruling on August 9.
The judge had been asked to make an order to allow attorneys for the TTRNA, the Association of Midwives and the Psychiatric Nurses Association to question Minister Terrance Deyalsingh on his appointment.
In his ruling, Rampersad declined to do so since, he said, “there was nothing else that remains for clarification and certainty in this matter.”
“The court is of the respectful view that the matter should be ended, having run its course.”
An application was made for him to strike out the claim, but the judge said it would only be proper for him to do so after hearing from the nursing bodies.
He invited the parties to submit their positions on the withdrawal or striking out of the claim by September 6.
The nursing bodies had challenged the minister’s decision to appoint selected members to the council before any elected members were appointed.
In their lawsuit, they said the minister’s decision to allow his six selected members to elect David Murphy as president of the council in October 2019, when there were no other members on the board, was unreasonable and irrational.
They had also asked the court to quash the decision to appoint Murphy as a member of the council and to revoke his appointment and have argued that the minister was aware they did not want the former president on the council.
The council consists of 16 members. Six are selected by the Minister of Health, nine are elected by the over 10,000 members of the profession and the Chief Nursing Officer serves as an ex-officio member. The council then votes for a president, vice president and treasurer.
Murphy’s tenure has long expired and this was one of the major factors the judge took into consideration.
In his analysis of the complaint against the minister’s appointment, Rampersad referred to Deyalsingh’s explanation given in his affidavit for appointing Murphy.
He referred to a previous ruling by Justice Frank Seepersad in a related but separate lawsuit involving Murphy, saying that the court had already provided an interpretation of the Nursing Personnel Act (NPA) and since there was no appeal of that ruling, it “remains a valid declaration made by a court of superior record within this jurisdiction.”
He also did not agree there was a public interest issue still to be resolved and analysed the nurses’ complaints over the minister’s authority to appoint members to the council.
Seepersad had declared that the minister’s authority to appoint members to the council was not contingent on the election of the nine others as outlined in the NPA.
Rampersad said, “Selections by the first defendant remain within the first defendant’s discretion and it is not for this court to fetter that discretion at this time by means of a generalised statement as to how it ought to be exercised.”
He added, “Not every selection in the future would be the same.”
Martin George and Keshavi Khoorban represented the nursing bodies. Senior Counsel Terrance Bharath, SC, Maria Belmar-Williams and Svetlana Dass represented the minister while Gerald Ramdeen, Umesh Maharaj and Dayadai Harripaul represented Murphy who was an interested party in the case.
BY: JADA LOUTOO
Nurses to decide on lawsuit against Health Minister
