AG on Partially Unconstitutional Sugar Industry Act

Attorney General Anthony Sylvester also responded to a decision on the Sugar Industry Act where the High Court has ruled that some sections of the act are unconstitutional. Among them is that a cane farmer has to be a member of an association to be able to deliver cane to the millers and that monies must be paid to the Sugar Industry Control Board and other committees by B.S.I. for their operational expenses. G.O.B. has had a meeting with the stakeholders since the ruling, including AG Sylvester.  He says that these longstanding arrangements were codified in the legislation and will now need to be revisited.

Anthony Sylvester

Anthony Sylvester, Attorney General

“That was a claim that was filed in 2022 by B.S.I. against the Attorney General. So there was a challenge to the Sugar Industry Act and B.S.I. as the manufacturer and there was also another claimant who would have been a cane farmer. So there was a challenge to different aspects, different sections of the act. They were partially successful. The court did rule that certain portions, certain sections of the act are unconstitutional and so, the office is still in the process of reviewing the decision with a view of providing advice to cabinet. Cabinet, of course, will have to consider the matter more fully and decide as it relates to what would be the way forward. There were of course some of the consequential orders made by the court in respect to the aspect of funding the operation of the Sugar Industry Control Board and the various agencies which include the sugar cane production committee, the quality control authority as well as they have a research and development institute. So those aspects or those part of the sugar industry control board; they were partially funded by the arrangement which has been for many, many, many years between the farmers and the manufacturers and which was codified in the legislation.”