When the AFC submitted a no-confidence motion against the Donald Ramotar government in 2014, the party had calculated that 33 votes in the 65-member National Assembly would be needed for the motion to succeed, according to political commentator Christopher Ram.
Labelling as “illogical” and “dangerous,” a view articulated by attorney Nigel Hughes – a former chairman of the AFC – that 34 votes were needed for the December 21 no-confidence motion against the David Granger administration to be successful, Ram has called on the AFC to reaffirm its acceptance of the results.
Two Fridays ago, former parliamentarian Charrandas Persaud defected from the government benches and supported the PPP/C-sponsored no-confidence motion thus handing the Opposition 33 votes for, as opposed to the APNU+AFC government’s 32 votes against, the motion. While the government initially accepted the results, there is growing debate about the validity of the vote and it is now exploring its legal options.
In a letter published in the Stabroek News yesterday, Ram was critical of Hughes for his stance and said that article 106 (6) Constitution is clear that “The Cabinet including the President shall resign if the Government is defeated by the vote of a majority of all the elected members of the National Assembly on a vote of confidence.”
He said that there are rules of interpretation of all statutes, of which the Constitution sits at the pinnacle. One foundational rule states that “the only safe and correct way of construing statutes is to apply the plain meaning of the words,” Ram wrote, adding that Hughes is “too clever” a lawyer for the plain meaning of Article 106 (6) to escape him.
Ram recalled that Hughes was the Chairman of the AFC when it brought a no-confidence motion against the Ramotar government in 2014. “I know about the AFC’s calculation of the 33-32 because then Party Leader Khemraj Ramjattan discussed the matter with me extensively prior to the actual motion being brought,” he wrote.
According to Ram, Hughes’ efforts are likely to be counterproductive to the APNU+AFC in the long run.
“To restore any decency, the leadership of the AFC must now emphatically reaffirm its position that it accepts the vote on the no-confidence motion as a done deal to prevent the discord and confusion engendered by the crusade of its former Chairman,” he said.
After the AFC filed its no-confidence motion on August 7, 2014, Ramotar chose not to face it and instead suspended the National Assembly. After coming under heavy criticism, elections were held in May 2015 which brought the APNU+AFC government to power.
