Power sharing as condition for extending Parliament’s life

Sep 27, 2019 Letters

---

DEAR EDITOR,

Reference your front page news (September 26), it was inevitable that the President would announce a date (Oct. 10) for the return of parliament sitting to legitimise alleged date violations of the constitution to hold elections arising out of the no confidence motion. He posited that elections cannot be held before March 2, 2020 suggesting it can be on that date or anytime thereafter. He claims he needs opposition approval in parliament to legitimise a date for holding of elections and said parliamentary approval would legitimise government’s actions and policies post December 21. The President is critiqued for seeking a blank cheque from the opposition for government’s actions since December 21 and future plans. How and under what conditions should there be opposition parliamentary approval for government’s actions since December 21 and a date for elections? There should be a power sharing agreement.
Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo in response to the President says he would not be blackmailed in an election date indicating PPP not returning to parliament. I suspect the party will return to parliament if there are specific requests under strict conditions and not endorsing a blank cheque. There should be some broad agreements under which some government actions can be legitimized in parliament with a two thirds majority (support from the opposition as required by the constitution) once a reasonable specific election date is announced.
Just to recap, elections should have been held before March 21 as a mandatory requirement emerging out of the no confidence motion (NCM) or before September 18 as per the final court ruling on the NCM. The life of the government and of parliament itself has expired. Its life could have been extended before March 21. But the government did not seek an extension; instead it sought judicial recourse that it lost. It had an additional six months thru September 18 to extend the life of parliament, but as others noted it failed to act defying the court. Anyone who studies parliamentary traditions would know that the life of the parliament cannot be extended once it has expired; parliament is dead. Any extension of its life must be executed before its expiration.
Parliament cannot be recalled after a successful NCM unless it is to consider extending its life with a two-thirds majority. The date for the extension of the life of government passed September 18. The life of parliament can’t be extended since the NCM ended its life on September 18, according to the CCJ. Parliament itself can’t meet and conduct business like it is normal politics. Prior to September 18, an extension of the life of parliament and or the government was legal. Thus, a parliamentary session on October 10 will violate long standing democratic principles of the parliamentary system of governance. Parliamentary democracy does not operate the way conceived by the government. It will be interesting to see the response from Caricom or Commonwealth.
The principle of Doctrine of necessity will have to kick in for parliament to meet but such a principle cannot be contrived; it must develop naturally out of unavoidable emergency conditions. Otherwise, governments can violate laws and invoke the doctrine ad hoc and at will. A condition for doctrine of necessity has been absent since December 21. One cannot defy the laws and then invoke doctrine of necessity. Lawyers will have to counsel how to legitimise the life of parliament without violating the principle of the constitution or worldwide democratic practices.
The opposition is hinting that a specific election date is needed in order for it to give consideration to legitimising government action. A general statement that an election cannot be held before March 2 will not suffice. It will not get approval or endorsement from the opposition or even the nation at large. Individuals I have interviewed do not favour the language of the President on an election date. Almost everyone describes it as a delaying tactic. (AFC states that it interprets the President’s statement as March 2 as the actual polling date).
The government needs the support of the PPP to give life to the doctrine of necessity or to extend life of parliament itself if that is possible. Thus, the PPP is in a strong position to dictate terms and conditions for extending support to the government. Will the opposition use its powers effectively and strategically or will it meekly give in?
Six additional months from the date of life of parliament (September 18) is a long time to wait for an election. And this time can be further extended by GECOM if it feels additional time is required to hold credible elections. There is precedent for such an act as happened in 2001. Some general rules should be put in place if parliament meets and the opposition considers any government proposal to extend its life via a doctrine of necessity.
Until elections are held, there should be some kind of broad power sharing agreement between the opposing sides. Such power sharing venture will give confidence to the two opposing forces to cooperate and help bring the divided nation together.
Among power sharing suggestions, there should be: an independent evaluation (by neutral objective professionals perhaps from the commonwealth or Carter Center) on whether conditions are appropriate for credible elections whenever a date is promulgated; parliament must be dissolved immediately after passage of the extension; balanced coverage in the state media of government and opposition — to be overseen or supervised by an appointee each of Jagdeo and Granger in charge of managing each state media including appointing a co-editor and co-manager of each organ such as the Chronicle and the broadcast TV/radio; an appointee of Jagdeo and Granger to manage UG in the absence of a VC; co-CEO of Oil and Gas or Energy Department (one each from Jagdeo and Granger) as well as to oversee and manage revenues from the industry; unlimited foreign and domestic observers of elections, and grants for accredited local observers of elections (identify some of the local bodies that would be accredited and given grants — state the amount; every polling station to have an objective neutral observer; establish a committee to look into starting a state carrier; mandate all political parties to hold internal democratic elections among membership to choose leadership and executives and all candidates for office; $100K (?) grant to every sugar worker who lost job; $35K (?) grant for every sugar worker still on payroll; 5% (?) increase in salary for public servants below a minimum thresh-hold income (say about $60K per month); all state boards to have a co-CEO and a co-manager one each appointed by Granger and Jagdeo; all state boards will have equal numbers of appointees from PPP and APNU+AFC Coalition; a board of equal numbers appointed by Granger and Jagdeo to oversee a newly created sovereign wealth fund; election campaign reforms limiting expenditure.
The above should be considered in any agreement to extend the life of parliament or support for the doctrine of necessity. This will help to instill some level of trust between the parties and remove doubts of voters about the electoral system. It will provide some level of faith in GECOM to hold credible elections and in the coalition to govern fairly in allocation and distribution of resources.

Yours truly,
Dr. Vishnu Bisram

---

---