Latest update February 23rd, 2025 1:40 PM
Latest News
- Miner dies after tree stump falls on head
- Drunken businessman shoots wife dead during argument
- Taxes collected by Bahamas on Guyana’s oil will soon outweigh our total earnings – Chris Ram
- Gov’t ignores concerns, reappoints Director, members of Environmental Assessment Board for 3rd consecutive year
- Pope Francis in critical condition after health deteriorates, Vatican says
Go to the polls, not the Courts – Chris Ram urges Govt.
Attorney-at-law and Chartered Accountant, Christopher Ram is calling on the Government to abort its intended course of action in response to the passage of the No-Confidence Motion. Ram thinks that the best bet for democracy is for the government to accept that it has fallen and head to the polls instead of the Courts.
Just yesterday, Speaker of the National Assembly, Dr. Barton Scotland, in response to a petition from the government, said that he will not reverse the safe passage of the Bharrat Jagdeo-sponsored No-Confidence Motion. So, the Motion stands.
However, the government has long signaled its intention to approach the courts if the Speaker’s decision does not prove beneficial. Again yesterday, Attorney General, Basil Williams said that government will be heading to the local courts and if necessary will head all the way to the Caribbean Court of Justice.
Minutes after the Speaker made his pronouncements yesterday, Ram told Kaieteur News that the government will do well to avoid the courts altogether and take its case to the people.
Ram referred to an example of the No-Confidence motion (NCM) by Conservative Party Leader Margaret Thatcher against the Labour Party Government led by Prime Minister James Callaghan voted in the UK Parliament on 28 March 1979 is instructive.
Ram recalled that on the declaration by the UK Speaker sometime after 10 p.m. that the motion was carried by 311 votes to 310, Prime Minister Callaghan immediately addressed the House, declaring “Mr. Speaker, now that the House of Commons has declared itself, we shall take our case to the country.”
He said that one day later, Callaghan drove to Buckingham Palace to formally tender his resignation and to ask the Queen to dissolve Parliament “as soon as essential business can be cleared up”. Parliament was dissolved on 7 April, 1979 – ten days after the vote – and elections held on 3 May, 1979 – thirty-six days after the vote.
Ram then referred this newspaper to a letter he wrote, pointing out that, “unlike Guyana, the UK has no single document called a constitution, and that while Guyana practices constitutional supremacy, in the UK, at least in theory, parliament is considered supreme. In the UK, there is no law that a simple or qualified or super majority is necessary for a no confidence motion to succeed. That is accepted as part of the supporting conventions which underlie their ‘unwritten’ constitution.”
Ram noted that in Guyana’s case, thirteen days following the No Confidence vote, there is still no action by the President or his Cabinet to call elections.
Attorney-at-Law, Christopher Ram
“In the UK example, the resignation took place one day later and the Parliament was dissolved within ten days. From all appearances, dissolution does not even seem to be on the mind of the lawyers in the Government. This clearly puts at risk the preparatory work needed to achieve elections to be held under Article 106 (7) within three months of the NCM.”
Ram said that Guyana’s embrace of democracy is once again being tested, and while this is being played out, the Venezuelan President would be looking on with interest, while investors become increasingly nervous.
Ram reminded that Article 106 (6) uses mandatory language and imposes a duty on the Cabinet, including the President, to resign if the Government is defeated on a no confidence motion.
Ram said, “This resignation under Article 106 (6), brings to a halt their functions, including aiding and advising the President in the general direction and control of the Government, proposing legislation, reviewing of contracts over fifteen million dollars and the making of appointments. They can no longer meet as a Cabinet, but there is nothing to prevent the former members meeting and offering advice to the President informally.”
He continued, “While the Constitution is silent on the specific date for the resignation under Article 106 (6), for the reason set out below, that resignation seems to be automatic, or intended to be with immediate effect. In any case, Article 232 (9) provides that the Interpretation and General Clauses Act (ICGA) shall apply for the purpose of interpreting the Constitution. Since no time is prescribed therefore, Section 39 of the ICGA provides that, “where no time is prescribed within which anything shall be done, such thing shall be done with all convenient speed.”
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
Crowds, chaos and complaints
Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- The folly of the cash grant distribution is a textbook case of what happens when a government,... more
Why the U.S. Should Strengthen Trade Ties with the Caribbean
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- A rules-based international trading system has long been a foundation of global commerce,... more
Weekend Cartoon
