Budget Cuts Saga… Constitutional Crisis looms if Chief Justice decision is to be applied

By Kiana Wilburg, February 2, 2014, By KNews, Filed Under News, Source

A constitutional crisis is looming and it is a by-product of the recent decision by the Chief Justice (Ag) Ian Chang on the contentious budget cuts case, says Speaker of the National Assembly, Raphael Trotman.

Raphael Trotman

The Parliamentary Opposition had made several cuts to the 2012 and 2013 budgets. On Wednesday the Chief Justice ruled that in keeping with the Constitution, the Opposition action was “unlawful.”

Chang ruled that in keeping with the Constitution, the Opposition can either approve or disapprove of the Budget in its entirety. And considering that there were no consultations on the budget between government and the opposition, the possibility of a‘disapproval’ is not a far-fetched conclusion. And herein lies our crisis.

If the budget is not approved then it could mean elections.

Speaker of the National Assembly, Raphael Trotman, explained that he is of the belief that the CJ’s ruling on the case is “flawed.”

This position was upheld by the Leader of the Political Opposition faction, A Partnership for National Unity, Brig. David Granger.

The decision handed down by the CJ specifically states that under the Constitution the Opposition does not have the power to cut the government’s budget.

He ruled that the role of fashioning the budget is vested in that of the Executive, more specifically, the Minister of Finance, Dr. Ashni Singh.

Chang explained that if the amendments are made to the estimates of the budget prepared by the Minister and then approved, it is no longer the budget of the Minister but that of the Assembly.

Chang noted as well that the Standing Order of the Parliament which has been used to justify the Opposition cutting the budget is not law but merely procedures of the House.

David Granger

But while he holds this belief, Trotman stated, “The Constitution is the supreme law and the Standing Order is a subsidiary to it in that sense. However, the Constitution also stated that Parliament may make its own rules and procedures.”

It is based on that provision that the Opposition believes that it is justified in its actions to cut parts of the budget that it deems unnecessary.

Trotman’s Lawyer, Khemraj Ramjattan indicated that he will be appealing the decision of the CJ.

Trotman agreed with this course of action as he said that if the decision were to be upheld in the Parliament then it would lead to a constitutional crisis.

In a public notification, Trotman also stated that there are three branches of government; the Executive, the Judiciary and Legislative. These, he said, are all separate and equal and are to respect the rights of each other.

It is upon this background that the Speaker further justified his approval of the motion to appeal.

Though the Opposition cannot cut the budget this year, the APNU Leader has already indicated that the budget could be shot down.

“The CJ seems to be saying that we don’t have the power to amend and it doesn’t make sense to us. If you bring a budget which has that you want $1B for the National Communications Network and we don’t agree with that then we would have to disapprove of the whole budget. And disapproving of the whole thing does not make sense.”

“The government has to be careful not to trigger a constitutional crisis as there would be one if his ruling is adhered to. It is a prejudicial ruling and so we will go to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).”

The Speaker said, “This situation requires maturity. The court is recognized as the interpreter of the constitution.

Chief Justice (Ag) Ian Chang

While we don’t share its view, we respect its opinion. We have heard from the lowest tier (the CJ) and he is just one tier.”

“The decision in itself will have an impact on future discussions. Both the Executive and the Opposition need to understand that they need each other and as difficult as it might be, this brings that reality and inevitability up faster than was anticipated.

“They now have no choice but to sit together and discuss what they would agree to. And if they can’t find a common ground then its best they say no budget and we go back to the polls and that is what it is coming down to. And it is an uncomfortable reality.”