NO OBSTRUCTIONS TO APPOINTING A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY

Apr 19, 2009 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

There is not going to be a parliamentary debate into the motion tabled by the Leader of the Opposition calling for a criminal probe into the problems of CLICO (Guyana). There has been a ruling that the motion submitted was not in compliance with Standing Order 26 of the Parliament.
That specific Standing Order sets out the criteria to allow motions to qualify for debate; and among the qualifications is that the subject of the motion should not be before a Court for adjudication.

A new motion could be considered in light of the fact that what is being challenged before the Courts are matters relating to the management of the entity and certain challenges to the process of judicial administration. A new motion dealing exclusively with a call for an investigation into investments by CLICO and withdrawal of funds from that entity just prior to judicial administration may still qualify but the main opposition may not be inclined to revisit this issue.
The use of Parliament therefore to force a commission of inquiry into the workings of CLICO (Guyana) is therefore at this stage highly unlikely. This, however, does not prevent the President of Guyana from appointing a Commission of Inquiry into CLICO (Guyana).

The President of Guyana does not need the approval of the Parliament to appoint a commission of inquiry. He did not need the sanction of Parliament before he appointed a commission of inquiry to probe the death squad allegations made against a former Minister of Home Affairs.
The President can, under the appropriate legislation, still go ahead and appoint an international commission of inquiry. The fact that there will be no debate on this matter in the Parliament does not preclude the President of Guyana from appointing a commission of inquiry.
After all, he said that he supports an inquiry and had instructed his ministers to support the opposition motion. And at the time when he said that, he knew that there were matters before the Courts of Guyana and the Bahamas relating to CLICO (Guyana).

The fact that a matter is before the Courts also does not prevent the President from appointing a Commission of Inquiry. There is nothing in the law which precludes the President from appointing a Commission of Inquiry into a matter which is before the Courts. Indeed, as the Leader of the Opposition pointed out during a recent television broadcast, a commission of inquiry is akin to a judicial inquiry. The laws of Guyana provide for Commissioners to have the powers of a High Court judge in respect to some of their functions under commissions of inquiry.

The opposition does not believe that the President is serious about conducting such an inquiry.
Now that the motion is not going to be discussed, the ball is back in the hands of the government. There should be a commission of inquiry into this matter because there are questions to be answered which will not be answered by the Courts and a commission of inquiry is the best way of answering those questions.
Among the questions to be answered are:

1) Whether CLICO (Bahamas) ever issued annuities for the close to seven billion dollars invested by CLICO (Guyana).

2) Whether there was any inside information that led to a run on CLICO (Guyana) and the degree to which this run caused the collapse of the company.

3) Who authorized the investments by the National Insurance Scheme into CLICO (Guyana). We are told on one hand that Cabinet baptized this investment and then on the other hand that Cabinet would only give general directions on such matters. What is the truth?

4) Why did the government allow CLICO’s bonds in the Berbice River Bridge to be sold?

5) When did the government learn that CLICO had over extended its investments outside of Guyana and what directions did the government issue, if any, in this regard?

6) Why did the government of Guyana allow the sale of the bonds in the Berbice River Bridge knowing fully well that such funds would likely be used to pay liabilities of the company when the bonds could have been held to secure NIS’s investments in CLICO (Guyana)?
The debacle involving CLICO (Guyana) constitutes the greatest financial scandal in the history of Guyana. And if for such a scandal we cannot have a commission of inquiry, it would seem logical that there is no need for a Commission of Inquiry Act.

Latest News

NO OBSTRUCTIONS TO APPOINTING A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| March, 17th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Maloney Pacers set sights on FIBA 3×3 World Tour qualifiers in...

Government, GOA pledge support for AAG

New Central High among latest winners in MCYS NSC...

Guyanese Ramdhani, Beaton, Beharry represent at...

GFF announces 24-man squad for Concacaf Gold Cup...

Anil Beharry Real Estate, Construction and...

Features/Columnists

America does not fight for free

If Guyana’s President Ali is the “Zelensky of the Caribbean”, who is the Putin?

Guyanese governor, a masterstroke, need to mend

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

NO OBSTRUCTIONS TO APPOINTING A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| March, 17th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Features/Columnists

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]