The main opposition APNU yesterday condemned a ruling by Speaker of the National Assembly Raphael Trotman on the no-confidence campaign against Home Minister Clement Rohee as riddled with errors, contradictory and of questionable legal soundness.
The ruling issued by Trotman on Friday without prior notice came down against the opposition’s moves to gag Rohee in the National Assembly and said that the minister will be allowed to participate fully in parliamentary life.
“The document is, unfortunately, replete with inaccuracies, of doubtful legal soundness and contradicts the documented positions previously taken by the Speaker,” APNU said in a statement issued yesterday.
It also called into question the circulation of the ruling, saying it was unprecedented for such an edict to be publicly released before presentation to the National Assembly.
It is believed that the APNU position could spark a showdown in the National Assembly and make Trotman’s position tenuous. Trotman had previously said that if either side expressed no-confidence in him, he would resign.
APNU’s statement pointed out errors and contradictions in the Speaker’s ruling.
It said: “The document claims that the Speaker was of the view that the National Assembly wanted to inhibit the Minister of Home Affairs from performing his ministerial functions. The reality is that, as a consequence of his dismal performance and failures over the last six years, the majority in the National Assembly passed a Motion of No Confidence in the competence of the incumbent to be responsible for the security of the Nation.
“The Speaker claims that, on Thursday 7th February 2013, the minister wanted to make a statement on the security sector. However, the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues, who were, at the time, meeting with the Speaker, were informed that the minister wanted to make a statement on the attack, by well armed bandits claiming to be police, on the General Secretary of the PNCR. The Leader of the Opposition did not agree to this. In any event, the minister, on being allowed to speak, made no such statement!
“It is evident that the document prematurely anticipated the awaited decisions of the learned Chief Justice and the conclusion of the deliberations of the National Assembly Committee of Privileges,” APNU said.
Other observers have noted that Trotman’s ruling came out of the blue and reversed earlier positions he had held.
Trotman earlier said that he would await a ruling of the court on a case that Attorney General Anil Nandlall brought challenging his decision to limit Rohee’s participation in Parliament until the Privileges Committee of Parliament had ruled on the issue.
Asked about his edict despite earlier stating that he would await a decision of the court, Trotman said he had continued to do research after an initial ruling that he was not convinced that the House had the power(s) to pass, and enforce the Resolution proposed in the Motion. “I was convinced in my mind that my original decision was right,” he told Stabroek News last Friday, adding that his research upheld that view.
As such, he said, he did not need to await the court ruling on the matter.
Trotman’s ruling that Rohee would be able to fully participate in parliamentary life came seven months after the opposition tabled a motion of no confidence against the embattled minister.
