– Bar Association,[url=http://www.chinanfljerseysauthentic.us@#$%&/]Cheap NFL Jerseys China[/url], women lawyersIn wake of calls for the government to reconsider its decision to make good on payment of damages awarded to a Surinamese beverage company, the mass of the country?s legal minds has warned that Guyana is in no way free to re-examine the decisions taken by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).Yesterday, the Guyana Bar Association and the Guyana Association of Women Lawyers cautioned against any suggestion that Guyana can consider itself at liberty to ?re-examine? decisions of the CCJ, the court which adjudicates trade disputes among CARICOM members.?That, we humbly suggest, is trying to urge that the court order be flouted. This could do serious harm to our reputation for the rule of law and as an investment destination,? the bodies of lawyers expressed yesterday.The two organisations reminded that the decisions of the CCJ as constituted in the recent Rudisa case are final and not subject to appeal.  The CCJ had awarded the company millions of dollars in a landmark court decision against the Guyana government.However, the Guyana Manufacturers and Services Association had raised concerns over government honouring the award.Prior to its amendment last month, the Customs Act had imposed an environmental tax ? $10 on each disposable container ? on Companies whose products Guyana imports.Rudisa had contested Guyana?s Environmental Tax levied against it when importing its soft drinks (Thrill) to Guyana, saying it was discriminatory and goes against the Treaty of Chaguaramus,[url=http://www.wholesalenfljerseyssale.us@#$%&/]Wholesale Jerseys[/url], which outlines free trade to signatory countries.The Company had weighed in on the fact that local importers did not have to pay it and the CCJ had ruled in Rudisa?s favour, citing that Guyana had to honour its treaty obligations, and ordered that the claimants are entitled to repayment.The People?s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C), who governed at the time,[url=http://www.cheapjerseysauthenticonline.us@#$%&/]Jerseys China Wholesale[/url], had refused to honour the award, but the new government assured that the US$6.2M damages awarded by the court since May 2014 will be given to the company.The decision taken by the government recently has sparked a debate, with the Guyana Manufacturing and Services Association (GMSA) calling for the decision to pay to be recanted. They asked the government to consider the ?gross unfairness? to locals who would be ?forced to pay twice? since they already pay Rudisa?s Environmental Tax with every purchase of the Thrill drink.The body highlighted the competition the Surinamese company brings to these shores and appealed for fairness and equity,[url=http://www.salecheapjerseys.us@#$%&/]NFL Cheap Jerseys[/url], while noting that members of its group face ?a slew of illegal non-tariff barriers? in countries in and outside of the Caribbean.Consequently, the government, through Minister of State Joseph Harmon, had made clear that it will in no way disrespect the ruling of the CCJ and will do as ordered.Yesterday, the Guyana Bar Association and the Guyana Association of Women Lawyers said they have noted statements in the media concerning the decision in the case.?Not only did the court find the tax a violation of the Revised Treaty of Chagauramas but from information available to the CCJ,[url=http://www.cheapjerseysnear.us@#$%&/]wholesale jerseys[/url], Guyana knew since the eleventh meeting of COTED (Council for Trade and Economic Development) held on May 22 ? 23 2001 that it was in breach of the Treaty,? the body said.?We are disappointed that the GMSA could have been so careless with the truth and disdainful of the obligation on Guyana as a subscriber to the CSME to comply with a judgment of the country?s and the region?s highest court in relation to the CSME,[url=http://www.wholesalejerseyssale.us@#$%&/]China Jerseys[/url],? said the two associations.They stated that they have read the judgment handed down by the CCJ and are satisfied that the GMSA has misinformed itself of all the evidence, including the re-examination. Further, the body pointed out that the GMSA statement also suggests that it has made the elementary mistake of failing to read the judgment of the court.?In the circumstances we consider that it would be responsible of the GMSA to take the appropriate action on its statement,? the release disseminated by the Presidents of the Guyana Bar Association and Guyana Women Lawyers? Association, Christopher Ram and Sadie Amin respectively, ended.