A House divided…Speaker bars Rohee from tabling Bills

Nov 23, 2012 News

---

By Leonard Gildarie

In what would be considered uncharted waters, Speaker of the National Assembly, Raphael Trotman, yesterday ruled that an Opposition motion to prevent embattled Home Affairs Minister, Clement Rohee, from speaking, be sent to a special committee.
The ruling, during another raucous, heated afternoon session that saw Trotman offering to resign, effectively blocks Rohee from tabling any Bills in Parliament until the matter has been heard by the Committee of Privileges, where the Minister will have a chance to defend himself.

The Parliamentary committee, headed by the Speaker, is the one that can investigate the conduct of Members of Parliament (MPs).
Government immediately protested the ruling with leader of the ruling People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) side, Prime Minister Samuel Hinds, insisting that it effectively makes the motion to gag Rohee a reality.
It will be the first ruling of its kind in the post-colonial period, the Speaker said.
The ruling would also drive home the growing divide between Government and the Opposition, Alliance For Change (AFC) and A Partnership For National Unity (APNU), which combined, have a one-seat majority in the National Assembly.
The motion to prevent Minister Rohee from speaking was tabled by APNU’s Leader, Brigadier (Ret’d) David Granger, but ran into trouble early yesterday. It would have followed from the Speaker’s ruling a few weeks ago when he said that he did not have the authority to stop the Minister from speaking.
Government has been stoutly defending the Minister who has come under fire for his handling of security in the country and especially with the Linden protests in July which resulted in the shooting death of three protestors.
Fiery session
The Opposition, through APNU’s Basil Williams, at the start of yesterday’s session, moved to suspend other matters that had been scheduled for handling. It would ignite hours of sharp words and angry retorts from both sides.
There were arguments from Attorney General Anil Nandlall and Bibi Shadick, who objected to the procedures adopted to allow the motion to be first heard.
Both AFC Leader Khemraj Ramjattan and APNU’s Basil Williams maintained that the motion was proper.
Arguments regarding Rohee’s freedom of expression and right to speak, as well as the fact that a court case is in progress to challenge the no-confidence against him, were also raised.
After listening to almost five hours of debate, the Speaker, referring to research on authorities in Australia, New Zealand and England…Commonwealth countries with Parliamentary systems similar to Guyana…said that regarding the rule of ‘sub judice’, which prevents discussion of cases in courts, he could find no reason not to have the National Assembly discuss the motion to prevent Rohee from speaking.
He conceded that if the National Assembly has to make a decision at the same time the court is asked to do so, on the same matter that would be wrong. He noted that each Member of Parliament has a right to freedom of expression, but there are instances where this could be removed.
No ordinary member
According to Trotman, the first Speaker to be elected by the opposition, in Rohee’s case, “he is no ordinary member…but a Minister”.
The House has the authority to regulate the conduct of its members, he insisted. “I am satisfied that the House does have the authority.”
He cited instances where the British House of Commons found that its courts did not have the power to interfere in the internal workings of Parliament.
“Parliament has to be left with unfettered control,” he stressed. The court has the right to do what the court has to do, but Parliament also has to do what it has to.
The Speaker also ruled that he is of the opinion that the procedure in tabling the motion from the Opposition Leader was appropriate, but said that he has misgivings whether Rohee was allowed his right to due process.
Before announcing his ruling, Trotman, a lawyer by profession, said that he believed that his decisions would not find favour with the parties and that he was prepared to go if any of the Parliamentary side asks for his resignation.
In sending the matter to Parliament’s Committee of Privileges, the Speaker said that he had examined similar issues in Australia where the House there had dabbled with different kinds of sanctions for its members, including not voting monies for ministries and not considering Bills tabled by affected members.
Gagged?
He made it clear that the Firearms (Amendment) Bill which Minister Rohee was intending to pass through the National Assembly yesterday would not be handled until the matter is heard by the Committee.
AFC’s Moses Nagamootoo, in accepting the ruling of the Speaker, said that his party has no intentions to move a no-confidence motion against him.
Shortly after the Speaker’s ruling to send the matter to the Committee of Privileges, Opposition Leader Granger, who tabled the contentious motion, inquired whether the matter would be debated. Trotman assured the House that the motion is not “dead” and could be debated after its return from the Committee.
Prime Minister Hinds, in response to the ruling said that his party, while respecting it for all intent and purposes, was of the opinion that it was tantamount to the motion being carried and becoming effective, since it would prevent the Minister from conducting his duties.
Yesterday’s latest salvo by the opposition came amidst criticisms as to whether the 10th Parliament has been a successful one.
Government has been battling with the opposition over the national budget and other issues since the National Assembly was sworn in back in January. The administration last week said it was moving to revive inter-party talks with both AFC and APNU to iron out the many issues which has seen few bills being piloted successfully.

---

---