The Guyana Government through GINA has called on the international community to monitor and consider statements and postures it may wish to make in support of the protection of parliamentary democracy and the legitimacy of the democratically elected government in Guyana.
Through the release of a document by the Government Information Agency (GINA) and circulated to international and regional bodies and titled, “The Government of Guyana’s Briefing to international and regional bodies on the post-November 28, 2011 general elections”, Government has again warned the Organisation of American States (OAS) Permanent Council, friendly international and regional organisations that the developments in the National Assembly and the wider society in Guyana are subverting parliamentary democracy and posing a serious and real threat to political stability.
“These developments in the Guyana National Assembly over the last 11 months are at their least disturbing and worrying, however, they become more sinister when taken holistically with the consistent undermining and subversion of parliamentary democracy based on “the dictatorship of one” and repeated declarations of the “new dispensation” by the two opposition parties that their supporters are the majority and they must have their day,” the document states.
Examined together with the Linden disturbances (July 18-August 22, 2012), the Agricola protests ( October 11, 15 and 16, 2012), and continuous attempts to have similar such road blockages in other areas (which in contrast have had little success thus far), the document also warned of the threats of more protests, the targeting of ethnic groups and threats against individuals in Government and anyone who publicly defends the Government in the social media, the Government of Guyana indicated to the international community, by way of the document its conviction that Guyana is under threat.
The document makes clear in chronological order the attacks launched by the political opposition immediately after the announcement of the results of the National and Regional Elections on November 18, 2011.
The document whilst outlining the division of powers in the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of Government also summarises agreements unanimously reached by the parliamentary political parties through an extensive inclusive consultative process that included communities across the 10 Administrative Regions and civil society, and the reneging of those agreements.
The document also specified the amendment to the Constitution which allows the Representative of the List of a political party to recall their Member of National Assembly on prescribed grounds for such removal. In the case of the government side, the President is the Representative of the List. This referred to and included the steps taken by the Opposition regarding Minister of Home Affairs Clement Rohee.
The Government has also detailed through the document the contraventions of the Guyana Constitution, parliamentary norms and conventions and the Standing Orders of the Guyana Parliament which have been committed and which continue to be under constant threat by the Opposition as a result of their one seat majority, along with other violations of the Constitution which have led Government to the conclusion that parliamentary democracy is being subverted.
The document also outlines that most of the powers attributed to the Government under the Constitution are being compromised by the “dictatorship of one” of the two opposition parties in the National Assembly hence; the Government has decided to document these disturbing developments for the attention of the international community.
The document also records Government’s futile attempts to reason with the two opposition parties which continue to go back on agreements and dismiss the authority of the Constitution, the Legislature and the Executive.
It also documents chronologically, Government’s 11 month unabated challenge during the 10th Parliament.
Government has also outlined to the international community, the Parliamentary Opposition’s actions based on what they called the “new dispensation in the National Assembly” regarding the composition of the Parliamentary Committees which does not reflect the result of the National Elections, that is they proposed a formula of 4 – 4 -1 and voted by majority for nine seats on all committees instead of the previous 10, with 4 for the PPP/C (with 49.3% of the electorate), 4 for the A.P.N.U. ( with 40% of the electorate) and 1 for the A.F.C.( 10.3 % of the electorate) which has also seen the Speaker being appointed from the smallest political party, the Alliance for Change ( AFC).
Government’s request for parity on the committees was rejected and its representation on all committees which the Standing Orders provided for “no less than 6 no more than 10 members” has been reduced to a minority.
The Government approached the High Court for a legal interpretation with regard to the composition of the parliamentary committees, but the Court did not rule in the Government’s favour. Additionally, both the A.P.N.U. and A.F.C. members rejected the government’s proposal and stated that the issue of the composition of committees had already been decided at 4-4-1. There are 22 committees constituted – 8 chaired by the Speaker; 5 chaired by the APNU; 5 special select committees pending the election of the chairpersons. The 4 sectoral committees have not elected their chairpersons pending the recommendation of the Standing Orders Committee to the National Assembly and its decision. It is important to point out that although the Speaker and or the APNU now control the chairmanship of all the parliamentary committees, few are functioning.
The Standing Orders’ provisions to allow the Government to independently set the date for sittings have been overturned.
The 2012 Budget which was the sole responsibility of the Government was read by the Minister of Finance, Hon. Dr. Ashni Singh, on March 30, 2012, and general debate began on April 10, 2012. On the eve of the debate on the Estimates, the AFC MP Khemraj Ramjattan and the APNU MP Carl Greenidge brought motions on the night of April 17, to cut the Budget Sub-Heads for the employment of contracted workers in the Office of the President, the Ministries of Education, Housing and Water, Health, Labour, Human Services and Social Security. The following day, April 18, 500 public servants including staff from the Parliament Office held peaceful pickets in front of the Parliament Building against the proposed cuts by the opposition. These motions were withdrawn at the April 18 sitting.
The Appropriation Bill for Budget 2012 was passed as amended with massive cuts of GY $ 20.9 Billion on April 26, 2012. Most telling are those government agencies which were reduced- the Office of the President, the Guyana Elections Commission, the Guyana Power and Light, the Ministry of Finance’s Low Carbon Development Strategy programme, the State Planning Secretariat, the Customs Anti-Narcotic Unit (CANU) and the Ethnic Relations Commission, one of 4 constitutional rights commissions.
The Government, in the interim again approached the High Court for a ruling on the reductions to the 2012 Budget by the opposition parliamentary political parties. The High Court ruled in the government’s favour stating that the Opposition-controlled National Assembly acted outside its constitutional remit in imposing the cuts to the 2012 Budget.
The document also outlined the actions of the opposition before implementing the cut. The issue of electricity tariffs at Linden was used to stir unrest in the township and draw the residents out in street protests. During this period, the paper documents the subsequent agitation of Lindeners inflamed by the Opposition parties which eventually resulted in the death of three persons and injuries to scores.
The opposition parties stated publicly that they had proof that the Minister of Home Affairs Mr. Clement Rohee gave orders to the Guyana Police Force to shoot the protesters; they based their case on alleged telephone communication between the Minister and the Commanding Officer on the ground, as well as videos they purported to possess to prove that the police shot the protesters.
During the Commission of Inquiry to which they agreed, the lawyers for the three killed and injured, several of them being APNU MPs as well as the new leader of the AFC, Mr. Nigel Hughes, were unable to deliver on their claims. They subsequently called for the removal of the Minister although the COI has not yet delivered its ruling.
The Leader of the Opposition, Mr. David Granger, submitted a motion seconded by M.P. Ramjattan of the AFC calling for the House to “Prevent Honourable Clement Rohee, M.P., Minister of Home Affairs, from speaking in the National Assembly”.
The Clerk of the National Assembly advised the Speaker that neither he nor the National Assembly had the power to prevent the Minister from speaking as a Member of Parliament. The Clerk also pointed out that the matter was sub judice and additionally the motion was in violation of several constitutional provisions.
Despite the facts, the Speaker ruled that the issue be sent to the Committee of Privileges and that the Minister would not be allowed to present any legislation in the National Assembly. The Speaker’s ruling shocked not only the Government, but many members of civil society and the public.
The Government insisted and continues to insist that the Minister has committed neither any breach of privilege nor any offence against the dignity of the Parliament. Furthermore, usurping of the Government Business on the Order paper when the motion was presented and heard on the same day, without notice, was unheard of, and unprecedented.
The document issued internationally has also outlined other actions by the Opposition regarding the Minister in addition to legislation and national programmes launched by former President Bharat Jagdeo which came under attack by the Parliamentary Opposition.
“In addition to the developments outlined in this document, the Government has been challenged with politically-driven disturbances organised and led by extreme and fringe elements of the APNU and the AFC, and other bodies to create political instability and reverse the gains that Guyana has made.”
It refers the international community to several attachments chronicling the activities of the Opposition over the past 11 months, including the prolonged period of 36 days of protest and occupation of the Linden Township as well as the Agricola protest which spiralled out of control.
The use of the social media where the incitement of violence against Guyanese of a certain political persuasion and of Indian descent (the largest ethnic minority) was being promoted was also documented for the international community. Special reference was made to Demerara Waves, Benschop Radio which were culpable in supporting and condoning the violence and burnings which erupted in Linden in the early hours of August 10 when they misinformed Lindeners that the Joint Services were in Linden and instructed by the President “to shoot to kil”.
The online media outlets were also accused of targeting persons for attacks through the publishing of their photographs and addresses.
The websites of OneVoicecanWin and Brutalfacts which openly called for the government to be brought to its knees was also mentioned.
“Fanning the flames of ethnic insecurities and promoting racial hostility and racial hatred and conflict are particularly reprehensible in a multi-ethnic society such as Guyana which has made steady progress over the years in overcoming the bitter legacy of racial antagonism which was sown in earlier times,” the document warned the international community as the appeal was launched for them to take note of the attack on the political stability of the nation by the joint Parliamentary Opposition.
