Opposition MPs mount legal challenge against House suspensions

Eight APNU+AFC parliamentarians have now initiated legal action, challenging their suspension over an unruly protest action they led in the House last year to thwart the passage of the Natural Resources Fund (NRF) Act.

From left: MPs Annette Ferguson, Christopher Jones, Ganesh Mahipaul, Sherod Duncan and Natasha Singh-Lewis

From left: MPs Vinceroy Jordan, Tabitha Sarabo-Halley, and Maureen PhiladelphiaIn the Fixed Date Application seen by this publication, the members have regarded the decision taken by the Parliamentary Committee of Privileges as “unconstitutional, null, void and of no legal effect”. The members are the Opposition’s Chief Whip, Christopher Jones and the coalition’s MPs, Sherod Duncan, Natasha Singh-Lewis, Annette Ferguson, Vinceroy Jordan. The MPs were seen shouting and blowing whistles in the House during the debate last year.

There was also a scuffle that ensued, which resulted in the forcible removal of the Mace. Reports of damage to property were also made.

The application was filed by the “shadow” Legal Affairs Minister and Opposition MP, Roysdale Forde, S.C., AFC’s Leader, Khemraj Ramjattan, and attorney Selwyn Pieters.

The respondents have been listed as the Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister, Anil Nandlall; the House Speaker, Manzoor Nadir; and the Clerk of the National Assembly, Sherlock Isaacs.

The MPs allege that their suspension breached the “audio alteram partem” rule since, according to them, they were not afforded the right to appear before the committee. The MPs claim also, that natural justice was breached since they were not given the opportunity to defend themselves.

The motion calling for their suspension was brought by the government’s Cheif Whip, Gail Teixeira, who accused the opposition MPs of gross disorderly conduct, contempt and breaches of privileges. Teixeira is a member of the Privileges Committee.

Below is a copy of the application issued by MP Ganesh Mahipaul:

https://docs.google.com/viewer...of-Guyana-et-al.docx

Eight APNU+AFC Parliamentarians officially suspended

Speaker of the National Assembly Manzoor Nadir is surrounded by the staff of the Parliament as they try to secure the Mace

In the wee hours of Friday, eight APNU+AFC Parliamentarians were officially suspended from the National Assembly after the House with a majority vote from the government side adopted recommendations of the Parliamentary Committee of Privileges.

A Motion for the House to adopt the recommendations was tabled by Minister of Governance and Parliamentary Affairs Gail Teixeira.

Also delivering remarks during the presentation of the motion were Deputy Speaker Lennox Shuman and Attorney General Anil Nandlall who are both members of the Privileges Committee and agreed that the actions of reprimand were necessary.

They both supported the decision to address the parliamentary disruptions resulting in the seizure of the Speaker’s Mace on December 29, 2021.

The opposition MPs now suspended are Annette Ferguson, Christopher Jones, Ganesh Mahipaul, Vinceroy Jordan, Tabitha Sarabo-Halley, Sherod Duncan, Maureen Philadelphia and Natasha Singh-Lewis.

The committee’s report recommended that MPs Jones, Mahipaul, Duncan and Singh- Lewis be suspended for four consecutive sittings of the National Assembly after they engaged in disorderly and disrespectful behaviour.

It was also recommended that MPs Ferguson and Jordan be suspended for six consecutive sittings following their “severe and egregious” violations that night.

These MPs were involved in the removal of the mace from its rightful position, causing damages; as well as injured and assaulted a member of staff from the Parliament Office.

The decision was taken in the face of a pending High Court application, filed earlier this week, seeking to prevent the National Assembly from adopting the recommendations.

On these grounds, Opposition Parliamentarian and Attorney Khemraj Ramjattan sought to get the Speaker of the National Assembly Manzoor Nadir not to move ahead with the Motion.

But Speaker Nadir said the matter was only filed and no Judge has been assigned.

“But in all of this it comes down to the discretion of the Speaker… I am happy to say that my discretion is founded in the Constitution, convention and Commonwealth practices.

“So, while I have listened to the honourable member Ramjattan, I now will have to disagree with him and ask that we proceed with the matter before us,” Nadir said.

These MP's have no shame.

Opposition seeks Full Court decision to send suspended MPs back to Parliament

Oct 01, 2022 News --- Source -- https://www.kaieteurnewsonline...-back-to-parliament/

By Zena Henry

Kaieteur News – While the High Court is set to make a decision regarding its jurisdiction to hear the case concerning the eight suspended opposition Members of Parliament (MPs), Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde has approached the Full Court seeking a conservatory order that would allow the disciplined MPs to return to their functions at the National Assembly.

Forde told the Kaieteur News that since High Court judge, Justice Damone Younge had refused to issue the conservatory order in light of a planned November 1, 2022 decision that will determine whether the court should be hearing the case; he has sought the intervention of the Full Court to have the order in place. Forde is seeking the conservatory order to allow the suspended MPs to maintain their status quo in Parliament until the substantive matter of their suspension reaches a conclusion.

Opposition Chief Whip Christopher Jones, Sherod Duncan, Natasha Singh-Lewis, Annette Ferguson, Vinceroy Jordan, Tabitha Sarabo-Halley, Ganesh Mahipaul, and Maureen Philadelphia were all suspended on July 21 during the 48th sitting of the National Assembly. The House officially approved a report of the Committee of Privileges, which recommended the suspension of eight Opposition members given their action during the controversial passing of the Natural Resource Fund (NRF) bill, including the removal of the ceremonial mace, a representation of the House’s constitutional power.

Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde (centre left) with Opposition Leader Aubrey Norton and the suspended MPs during the filing of the court matter against their removal from Parliament

The opposition lawyer is seeking an urgent hearing of the Notice of Appeal filed against the decision of Justice Younge. The application is asking the court that pending the hearing and determination of the Appeal, “a Conservatory Order, Injunction Order or other Order suspending the effect, operation and or validity of the Report of the Parliamentary Select Committee of Privileges on the Privilege Motion – 24th January, 2022 and adopted by the said Committee on the 9th day of June, 2022,” be issued.

Pending the hearing and determination of the Appeal, “a Conservatory Order, Injunction Order or any other Order suspending any decision, resolution or other determination of whatever nature whatsoever by the National Assembly to suspend the Applicants’ Membership of the National Assembly”, is being requested as well as an order that the Applicants be allowed to perform their duties as Members of the National Assembly until they have been afforded the right to be heard before the Parliamentary Sessional Select Committee of Privileges on the Privilege Motion – 24th January, 2022.

The MPs are seeking further the order to maintain the status quo while the court determines the validity of the Report of the Parliamentary Sessional Select Committee of Privileges on the Privilege Motion – January 24, 2022 and adopted by the said Committee on the June 9, 2022. The appeal to the court seeks an order suspending any decision, resolution or other determination of whatever nature whatsoever by the National Assembly to suspend the Applicants’ Membership of the National Assembly. The document insists that the opposition MPs be able to function as per normal until they have been afforded the right to be heard before the Parliamentary Sessional Select Committee of Privileges on the Privilege Motion – January 24, 2022.

The opposition parliamentarians have claimed that they were not given the right to a hearing following claims of misconduct during the passing of the NRF bill in December of last year. The MPs had charged that the People’s Progressive Party/Civic government was hurriedly moving ahead with the passage of the amended NRF bill despite their request to view and submit their input on the reworked legislation that deals directly with the handling of Guyana’s oil and gas revenues.  They claimed that the government, among other things, weakened the oversight provisions within the law that was passed by the previous administration, and they were unwilling to have it go through the House without a fight, especially since the government has a one-seat majority that would see them outvoting the opposition members.

After protesting the passage of the bill by banging their desks and chanting loudly against the passage did not work, some opposition members sought to remove the ceremonial mace which must be in place for the passage of any legislation and causing much uproar.

The report of the Parliamentary committee showed that the Opposition MPs were invited to show cause why they should not be punished for their actions, but they instead denied having committed any illegal act and asked that the Committee point them to the specific standing orders which they would have violated. This, the MPs said, was not done, but the government side of the House proceeded to vote for the adoption of the report and its recommended discipline.

Given the significant number of opposition MPs that would be out of Parliament for several sittings, they are saying that the suspension does not sit well for transparency and scrutiny. Attorney for the applicants, Selwyn Pieters had said during an earlier hearing of the matter, that the suspension of the MPs inhibited the democratic process by removing duly-elected representatives of the people.

Full Court declines to grant order for suspended APNU/AFC MPs to attend Parliament

The Demerara Full Court on Friday unanimously refused to grant interim orders and injunctions requested by eight suspended APNU/AFC Members of Parliament (MPs) which, among other things, would have allowed them to attend sittings of the National Assembly.

Opposition Chief Whip Christopher Jones, Ganesh Mahipaul, Sherod Duncan, Natasha Singh-Lewis, Annette Ferguson, Vinceroy Jordan, Tabitha Sarabo-Halley and Maureen Philadelphia were, in July, officially suspended for participating in the infamous grabbing of the Speaker’s Mace — the most significant symbol in the National Assembly – and for disrupting the sitting of the National Assembly on December 29, 2021 during their protest against the second and third readings of the Natural Resource Fund (NRF) Bill.

Through Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde, the MPs had mounted a challenge against their suspension at the Demerara High Court, arguing, inter alia, that it was unconstitutional.

Pending the hearing and determination of the substantive matter, they had requested several conservatory orders and injunctions which, if granted, would have allowed them to attend Parliament.

But High Court Judge Damone Younge declined to grant the orders requested, including an interim order suspending any decision to suspend these MPs. In so doing, Justice Younge declared that, firstly, she wanted to determine if she has jurisdiction to hear the case, before addressing her mind to the reliefs the MPs are seeking. Consequently, she has adjourned the case until November 1, 2022 for a full hearing on the issue of jurisdiction, as well as to address an application filed by Attorney General Anil Nandlall, SC, for the case to be dismissed.

The MPs then turned to the Full Court to appeal Justice Younge’s refusal to grant the reliefs they requested.

Finding that the issues raised in the suspended MPs’ appeal were “premature” and identical to those raised before Justice Younge, the Full Court — comprising Justices Sandil Kissoon and Jo-Ann Barlow — dismissed their appeal without awarding costs against them.

In delivering the court’s ruling, Justice Barlow held that since there is no final decision/order by the lower court on the issues: of the question of jurisdiction and the grant of conservatory orders/injunctions, there can be no appeal to the Full Court.

Justice Barlow has made clear that the Full Court has not pronounced on the issue of jurisdiction, only that, given the grave public interest nature of the case, it must be determined and disposed of with alacrity.

Before the Full Court, Forde had contended that the absence of his clients in the National Assembly would not only negatively affect the interest of the persons who had elected them, but also the strength of the Parliamentary Opposition and the general public interest.

Further, he aruged that their suspension would deny them the right, as MPs, to examine and approve the Government’s proposed budgetary expenditure and withdrawals from the Consolidated Fund.

Alluding to the Government’s announcement of its intention to table amendments to electoral legislation at the next sitting of the National Assembly, Forde had submitted that the Parliamentarians’ presence in the House is vital.

The decision to suspend the eight APNU/AFC MPs was made by the Parliamentary Committee of Privileges. Among other things, that Committee had found that the behaviour of these MPs during the sitting had violated Standing Orders and established customs and practices regarding acceptable behaviour of Parliamentarians.

The Committee of Privileges was tasked with considering a Privilege Motion which stated that the eight Opposition Members, in attempting to prevent the second and third readings of the Natural Resource Fund (NRF) Bill, No. 20 of 2021, had conducted themselves in a gross, disorderly, contumacious and disrespectful manner, and had repeatedly ignored the authority of the National Assembly and that of the Speaker, thereby committing contempt and breaches of privileges.

Following investigations, the Parliamentary Committee of Privileges delivered its report in mid-July, recommending the suspension of these eight Opposition MPs for violating Standing Orders and established customs and practices regarding acceptable behaviour of Parliamentarians.

It was therefore determined that the appropriate sanction available for the National Assembly to impose is suspension from service in the House.

Consequently, Jones, Mahipaul, Duncan and Singh-Lewis were each suspended for four consecutive sittings: for attempting to prevent the second and third readings of the NRF Bill; for conducting themselves in a gross, disorderly, contumacious and disrespectful manner; and for repeatedly ignoring the authority of the Assembly and that of the Speaker, thereby committing contempt and breaches of privileges.

MPs Ferguson and Jordan were each suspended for six consecutive sittings for similar offences. However, their suspension was higher, since the Privileges Committee concurred that they had committed “serious violations which were severe and egregious, by unauthorisedly removing the Parliamentary Mace from its rightful position in a disorderly fashion, causing damage to the Mace; and injuring and assaulting a staff of the Parliament Office while attempting to remove the Mace from the Chamber”.

A similar suspension for six consecutive sittings was imposed against Sarabo-Halley, whose violations were found to be “severe and egregious with regard to unauthorisedly entering the Communication Control Room of the ACCC and destroying several pieces of audio-visual equipment, being public property”.

MP Philadelphia is also facing a suspension of six consecutive sittings over her severe and egregious violations, by which she “verbally assaulted a staff of the Parliament Office within the precincts of the National Assembly”.

These people may be trying to imitate Jagan and South Korean parliamentarians.  They each should be given long suspensions with no pay.  Guyana is a country with sub-human racial hate.  If you behave like this in parliament then it is some poor person on the streets who cannot afford to hire firearms carrying Afro-Guyanese protection that will be paying the price for the indirect sturring up of racial hate.

@Ali Khan Azad posted:

These people may be trying to imitate Jagan and South Korean parliamentarians.  They each should be given long suspensions with no pay.  Guyana is a country with sub-human racial hate.  If you behave like this in parliament then it is some poor person on the streets who cannot afford to hire firearms carrying Afro-Guyanese protection that will be paying the price for the indirect sturring up of racial hate.

Do you think it's time for Bharat Jagdeo to go?

Hell no.  He is my President. The Honorable President Jagdeo.  If Irfan wants a war that he cannot deal with then let him go that route.