The High Court has dismissed a lawsuit brought by the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) against the Attorney General, Regional Executive Officer Karl Singh, and the Regional Democratic Council (RDC) of Region Nine over the party’s removal from its longtime Lethem headquarters.
In a judgment delivered on 24 August 2026, the court found that the PNCR had no legal entitlement to remain on the premises and that its removal did not amount to trespass, or a breach of constitutional rights.
The disputed building, located in Lethem, had served as the PNCR’s regional headquarters for decades. The party was removed from the premises in March 2023, prompting it to file proceedings against the State and regional authorities.
The defendants maintained that the land and building were state property vested in the RDC, and that the PNCR had occupied the premises without the state’s permission. They argued that the party remained at the location despite repeated notices from the Regional Executive Officer to vacate.
The PNCR alleged that Mr. Singh, contractor Dale Kennedy, and members of the Guyana Police Force entered the property without its permission, demolished portions of the structure, removed party property, and prevented its return.
The party sought declarations that its constitutional rights had been breached, damages for alleged trespass and conversion of goods, and an injunction barring the defendants from re-entering the premises.
However, after hearing evidence from both sides, the court found that the PNCR failed to produce a lease, title, or other document establishing ownership or a legal tenancy.
The court held that the property belonged to the state and was under the control of the Region Nine RDC. While the PNCR had occupied the building since the 1970s, the Court found that this long occupation amounted to permission from the state, rather than a legally enforceable property right.
The Court also found that the RDC had provided sufficient notice for the PNCR to vacate. Notices were reportedly issued from November 2021, repeated on several occasions, and followed by a final deadline in January 2023, before the RDC reclaimed the building in March of that year.
Since the PNCR’s permission to occupy the premises had been lawfully withdrawn, the Court ruled that the defendants’ entry and recovery of the property did not constitute trespass.
The Court further rejected the PNCR’s allegation that its belongings were unlawfully converted. It found that items removed from the building were inventoried, stored by the RDC, and remained available for collection.
The party’s claims of constitutional and international human-rights violations were also dismissed. The judge concluded that the State’s actions represented the lawful exercise of its property rights, rather than discrimination or an unconstitutional deprivation of property.
The party was ordered to pay costs of $300,000 to the Attorney General.
The PNCR was represented by attorney Darren Wade. Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs Mohabir Anil Nandlall, SC, MP, appeared for the state alongside State Counsel Pierre Squires.
