The PNCR and the no-confidence motion against its Leader

Jan 12, 2023 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

Kaieteur News – The person against whom a no-confidence motion is passed is obligated to resign forthwith. It does not require any written law or rule for this to happen. By convention, the target of a no-confidence motion is required to step down.

The Constitution of Guyana makes it mandatory for the Government to resign should a no-confidence motion be passed against it. But even in the absence of such law, Governments are expected to resign once the legislature passes a no-confidence motion against it. A no-confidence motion is a system of recall outside of elections. It allows for the recall of persons or governments outside of elections. It is often the only means available to recall governments outside of elections. There have been reports circulating in the media that the Florida PNCR Region has submitted a motion to the Central Committee of the PNCR. That motion reportedly expresses a loss of confidence in the leader of the party.

There is also a report which suggests that such a motion is of no legal effect since it is only Congress which can remove the Leader. While it is true that Congress elects the Leader of the party this does not mean that the Leader cannot be forced to resign or to demit the Leadership.

One such way in which the Leader is compelled to resign is if there is a vote of no-confidence by the General Council in the leader. While there is no written law mandating this, there is the standing convention that a leader who does not enjoy the majority of support of the General Council should resign. If therefore a motion of no confidence is passed against the Leader of the party, by convention he is expected to resign. In such a circumstance, the Chairman will act as Leader until Congress elects a new Leader. The Central Executive Committee does not have the authority to fill vacancies of officers but this does not mean that it cannot also express no-confidence in any officer.

But such an opinion would not carry the same force as one from the General Council which is responsible for governing the party in between congresses. It is the General Council and not the CEC which has the authority to appoint someone to act as interim leader in the event that the Leader cannot function via incapacity.

The Constitution of the PNCR states that if the office of Leader becomes vacant due to death, incapacity, resignation or other circumstance, the Chairman shall assume the functions of the Leader for the time being. Thus, the Constitution makes provision for the possibility of the Leader resigning – and no doubt this has to include resigning following a motion of no-confidence. After the national elections debacle, there were reports in the media which suggested that Regional Groupings had discussed the question of confidence in then Leader, David Granger. If this is true then there can hardly be a basis for claiming that there is no accommodation for debating no-confidence motions within the organs of the party. There is precedent and there is no prohibition in the Constitution for such a discussion

In any event, the Constitution of the PNCR announces itself a democratic party committed to freedom of conscience It would be in conflict with the party’s underlying philosophy for the position to be adopted that there is no place for a no-confidence motion against the Leader.

Also, there is within the party structure, a right to removal of officers. The right of removal of officers of Groups is enshrined in the party’s Constitution – officers may be removed by a 2/3 majority vote. The PNCR leadership therefore should not dismiss the no-confidence motion which is said to have been submitted to the Central Executive Committee.

Once a Leader loses the support of his Executive he should resign. Boris Johnson resigned recently and so did Liz Truss after both failed to command the confidence of the majority of their colleague Conservative parliamentary representatives. But Britain is a country where conventions still carry moral weight and force, unlike in Guyana where even when the law says you should resign, all manner of disingenuous interpretations are adopted.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of this newspaper and its affiliates.)

Boris Johnson, Constitution of Guyana, Government, Peeping Tom, PNCR

Latest News

The PNCR and the no-confidence motion against its Leader

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | December, 2nd, 2024

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Rana five-for and enterprising batting put Bangladesh in the...

ANSA McAL on board with inaugural National Futsal...

GBF unveils squad for 2024 FIBA 3×3 AmeriCup...

Someash Boyer benefits from Project “Cricket...

Several athletes and coaches aiming to benefit...

GAPLF congratulates Dominic Tyrell for taking...

Features/Columnists

A retrograde and shortsighted step

Haiti: Tragically Descending into Deeper Crisis

Wanted Pathfinders

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

The PNCR and the no-confidence motion against its Leader

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | December, 2nd, 2024

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 […]