THE CONSTITUTION AND THE PRIME MINISTER

Nov 28, 2010 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

The Prime Minister in any country, under any political system that recognizes such a post, is a very important person. Even where there is an Executive Presidency, the Prime Minister is a vital and powerful part of the government, a fact that is not always acknowledged and recognized.
One of Mr. Burnham’s Prime Ministers, Dr. Reid, was a powerful man. Even though executive authority resided with the President, Mr. Burnham delegated substantial responsibilities to his Prime Minister and Mr. Reid wielded great authority. All ministers in the PNC were effectively answerable to Dr. Reid.
After Dr. Reid’s retirement, things began to change. The focus was shifted more to the team of Vice Presidents, and while the Prime Minister still retained tremendous authority, it was never as in the case of Dr. Reid, who could instruct and direct ministers of the government.
When the PPP came to power, Mr. Samuel Hinds, a member of the Civic component of the PPP was appointed as Prime Minister. However, a problem immediately arose over the Prime Minister’s role in parliament. While Mr. Hinds was the Prime Minister, the leader of the government’s business in the House was held by a party stalwart, presenting an anomaly that would later become the subject of constitutional reform.
But what mainly triggered constitutional reform in respect to the Prime Minister was the “musical chairs” that the PPP government engaged in to facilitate the swearing-in of Mr. Bharrat Jagdeo in 1999.
After Mrs. Jagan decided that she could no longer continue as President, a replacement had to be found. The constitution provided that she be succeeded by the Prime Minister.
The PPP however claimed that there was an agreement between the party and its civic component that the party would always hold the Presidential position and the Civic, the Prime Ministerial position. As such, a party person had to succeed Mr. Jagan as President. That choice was Mr. Jagdeo.
But since the constitution provided for the Prime Minister to succeed the President, then it meant that Mr. Hinds had to step down as Prime Minister, allow Mr. Jagdeo to be sworn in as Prime Minister, allow Mrs. Jagan to resign and then Mr. Jagdeo to take her place, and then have Mr. Jagdeo swear in Mr. Hinds as Prime Minister. The opposition described this as game of musical chairs and soundly condemned it as making a mockery of the constitution.
This issue was examined during the constitutional reform process and it was agreed that henceforth the substantive Prime Minister should succeed the President, thus avoiding a repeat of any musical chairs. The reform process also insisted that the Prime Minister be the leader of the government’s business in the House.
In terms of the Prime Minister, Article 101(1) provides that the President shall appoint an elected member of the National Assembly as Prime Minister of Guyana. Thus, the substantive Prime Minister of Guyana, has to be an elected member and not an unelected or technocrat.
But what about an acting Prime Minister? Would it be a violation of the Constitution for a non-elected member of the National Assembly to act as Prime Minister or to perform the functions of the Prime Minister when the Prime Minister is absent from Guyana?
In addressing this issue, the constitution must be examined in its totality, and not selectively, in arriving at this judgment. The examination must go beyond the specific article that deals with the appointment of the Prime Minister.
In Article 101, which deals with the appointment of the Office of the Prime Minister, the subtexts of the constitution make this very clear. The person appointed to that office must be an elected member of the National Assembly.
Article 103 provides that the Prime Minister and every other Vice President shall be a Minister of the Government. Thus the Prime Minister is a minister.
It should be noted that Article 106 provides that the President shall preside over meetings of the Cabinet and in the absence of the President, the Prime Minister shall preside; and in the absence of both the President and the Prime Minister, the Cabinet shall be presided over by such minister as the President may designate. So a minister can preside over Cabinet in the absence of the President and Prime Minister.
Article 109 goes on to state that whenever any minister (and since the Prime Minister is a minister under Article 103, this includes him or her also) is absent from Guyana or unable to perform his (or her) functions, the President may authorize some other minister to perform those functions, until the first named minister returns or is able to resume the performance of his or her functions. By virtue of the foregoing, it is respectfully submitted that the President can appoint someone to perform the functions of Prime Minister until the substantive Prime Minister returns or is able to do so, and that the requirement of the Prime Minister being an elected member of the National Assembly does not necessarily apply in this instance, since the constitution allows for the President to authorize the performance of those functions.
Thus it is submitted that Dr. Ashni Singh was, of recent, properly appointed to perform the functions of Prime Minister, which he lawfully did until the substantive Prime Minister returned.

---

---