Stop fighting the truth "cain", its clear to see, the joint opposition are on a quest to make the country ungoverable, in a bid to gain power through the back door, the Guyanese Populace are growing impatient of the sinister schemes of the joint opposition

Government challenge speaker to act fearlessly

Government is contending that sittings of the National Assembly are fast becoming a stage for antics and the extreme.

These comments come in light of the Joint parliamentary opposition’s disruption of recent sittings of the national assembly, during which Clement Rohee attempted to execute his functions as the Home Affairs Minister.

As it remains now Dr Luncheon says the next sitting of the House leaves room for conjecture.

And to this end he says the government will continue to hold the Speaker of the national assembly responsible with the hope that he would discharge his duties fearlessly.

A notion which Speaker Raphael Trotman told News update he is happy that the government maintains.

In recent months the joint parliamentary opposition has voted in favour of a motion of no confidence against Minister Clement that called for his resignation.

However, the administration continues to stand in support of the minister maintaining that the power to hire or fire a minister of government rests solely with the president.

 Under any democratic system...Rohee would be history. Unfortunately, the PPP will not bend to exhortations or even bended knees. It is clear they will not concede their complete authority over the state.

In my opinion the opposition, will have to be able to use any means to deter the wanton exercise of power by the PPP. Before the next elections can be called, minority governments could only exist if coalitions failed within a prescribed period and then the largest majority takes the helm. Even then, the majority can still call for new elections and not a minority president alone. Failure of parliament is a two sided affair so either side must have that prerogative.

Really!

If Storm say so.... is so.

I agree with you! Else the "Mexican Standoff".

The joint opposition sinister motive to remove Minister Rohee may lead to political suicide

He a wan waste. Drugs, murda, crimes pun he watch. No wan a get ketch. He a wan waste. 

the only suicide i can see here is rohee killing himself which he should do as soon as possible it should be in the papers tomorrow breaking new low life dumb stupid rohee kill self whole country is happy

The Home Affairs Minister should stand his ground and be form, no fiery darts  directed to himself shall pierce him integrity

con i see you getting paid for over time,you sucking the taxpayers money and posting a lot of shit on this site

Its clear to see, the goons of the opposition has very little to constructively contribute, thus they usually try their best to derail the threads

Maybe I can help you with some wisdom old man.  I saw this in the today's paper:

IN THE KN

We endorse Swami Aksharananda’s sentiments

Dear Editor,
We endorse Swami Aksharananda’s sentiments expressed in his letter to the media caption “Dipavali should not be used as an occasion for attacking one another” and his appeal for messages on religious occasions to be generous and charitable as well as the need for extending open palms rather than clenched fists.
As the Swami recognized, politics and religion are deeply intertwined and as our research has discovered, uncompromising stance are necessary at times of injustice and inequality. This has played out in all of the epics of Hinduism be it the Mahabharata war or between Ram and Ravan in the Ramayana.
It is the PPP, the most powerful political force in Guyana at the last elections that show signs of intransigence in refusing to have Mr. Clement Rohee resign as a Minister.

Mr. Rohee is the person ultimately responsible for the death of over 200 young men as the head of the security sector and the only fair option at this time is his removal from that sector.

Therefore, if the majority of Guyana continues to stand firm on this issue, it is not intransigence, it is politics of principle. The responsible opposition reaction to the cutting down of over 200 young lives at the barrel of the Police guns can demand nothing less.  The AFC must stand firmly with the values of goodwill and generosity of spirit by ensuring those ultimately responsible for these irresponsible, reckless and unlawful losses of life are justly treated.  The just treatment for Mr. Rohee is summary removal from the security sector.
If that is what Swami calls a scorch earth policy, then we are proud to support such a policy since justice must be served to the victims and their families.
With rights to govern, comes the responsibility to govern and the two cannot be separated.  The PPP as the Government must be held responsible for the poor state of governance and personal security in Guyana, not the AFC.
The agents of the PPP, instead of shooting those 200 men or denying the mother at Plastic City proper Housing or the workers of Guyana a living wage, could have taken a more progressive position on crime fighting, housing and the income of the workers.
The strongest political forces must approach the developmental challenges in Guyana with open palms rather than clench fist.  Cutting down 200 youths in their prime with bullets is a clench fist strategy.  Having mothers live in filth and unsanitary condition at Plastic City while the PPP leaders live in Taj Mahals, is a clench fist strategy.
Paying the Gail Teixeiras and Odinaga Lumumbas million dollar salaries when the sugar workers earn less than $50,000 a month is a clench fist strategy.  Spending over $50 billion of taxpayer funds without their permission on “pie in the sky” projects like the Marriot Hotel is a clench fist strategy.
Guyana is being scorched not because of the AFC but because of the PPP failure to put in place competent ministers, public policy and systems of justice and fairness.
Thus we plead with Swami and other religious leader with his wisdom such as the Catholic and Anglican Bishop to be more actively engage in the process of bringing the entire dialogue back to the center of gravity.
As a prerequisite for this to happen, Rohee must be removed forthwith from the security sector since he has been an abject failure at protecting and serving the citizens of the nation.
Dr Asquith Rose and Harish S. Singh

Opposition cannot constitutionally gag Rohee − Nandlall

Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister Anil Nandlall on Friday indicated that no action by the parliamentary opposition can legally and constitutionally bar Home Affairs Minister Clement Rohee from speaking in the National Assembly.

Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister Anil Nandlall

Nandlall during a television interview on the National Communications Network (NCN) reviewed the previous attempts by the opposition to do this via a no-confidence motion, and the use of their one-seat majority with the numerical strength which prevailed against reason and principle.
Minister Nandlall then alluded to the fact that the law, the Constitution and the Standing Orders of the National Assembly, together compels Minister Rohee to perform his functions as minister, and his functions in the National Assembly. He added that there is nothing in law, and in the Constitution which would empower the Speaker of the House to prohibit Minister Rohee from speaking.
The attorney general (AG) also pointed to the fact that the Speaker sought and obtained two legal opinions from Senior Council Rex McKay and Attorney Stephen Fraser, and that both of those opinions coincided with the arguments presented by him from the time the no-confidence motion was presented to the Parliament three months ago.
He explained that the Speaker gave a written ruling and he captured the legal opinions within. The questions: whether the president of Guyana is obliged to act on a motion adopted by the National Assembly, and whether Minister Rohee could continue to perform his duties as minister of home affairs in the National Assembly were answered in the Speaker’s ruling. AG Nandlall also pointed to the Speaker’s ruling, citing a case emanating out of Dominica that, “the customs, practices and conventions of the UK House of Commons as applying to no-confidence motions and resolutions do not as  a matter of course apply to Guyana.”

Home Affairs Minister Clement Rohee

Nandlall emphasised that the Speaker ruled that the practices and conventions of the United Kingdom parliament do not apply to Guyana, based on the advice he has received. This was exactly what he (Nandlall) had previously articulated.
“When the Speaker made that ruling, what the members of the National Assembly did, as Minister Rohee attempted to present a bill, they started to make a lot of noise in the assembly, they shouted and banged on the desks, saying ‘Rohee must go’. They were very loud, drowning out Minister Rohee’s voice, in complete disregard for the Speaker’s ruling, and in an attempt to clearly undermine the authority of the chair in the National Assembly. As a result, the Speaker got up and walked out of the Assembly,” the AG recalled.

Unruly behaviour
Parliament, the AG said has similar power as the court to find persons in contempt and explained that disrespect in the face of the Parliament constitutes conduct which the Speaker is witnessing himself, which makes it impossible for the Parliament to function, which would bring into disrepute the integrity of the institution of that august body.
“When those acts are committed, the presiding officer, the Speaker of the National Assembly has an inherent power to maintain order and to maintain decorum, rectitude, and maintaining the integrity of the tribunal, the law invests that officer with the power to punish for contempt. There it is the joint opposition has displayed contempt in the face of the Parliament by defying the Speaker’s ruling the first thing, and then disregarding the Speaker’s order for them to restore order in the assembly.”
The Speaker also fell into irreversible error during his decision when he said that it was uncomfortable and unpleasant for him to make the ruling.

AFC leader Khemraj Ramjattan

The attorney general noted that a Speaker is an impartial person even though he may be the consequence of a partial political process which Raphael Trotman has come though.
“When he assumes the chair, difficult as it is, he is to unmask that political garb… he has to be an impartial adjudicator of the National Assembly… because he has to listen to arguments on both sides and rule, not because of political partisanship, but because of principles, because of the law, because of the Standing Orders, because of the Constitution, those are the guiding principles, not political affinity. Therefore, it is incumbent and imperative that he remains politically aloof,” Nandlall stated.
The AG then pointed to the second statement made by the Speaker at the end of his ruling, where he proceeded inexplicably to advise the joint opposition to bring a substantive motion to gag Minister Rohee.
“That I understand is what he is inviting them to do. But when you examine what his ruling says, you will find that he has placed himself in a conundrum from which it is impossible for him to extricate himself and that conundrum is this, he is saying, ‘I can find no provision within in the Standing Orders of the National Assembly, the Constitution and the laws of Guyana which restrains an elected member from fulfilling his functions, he can find none, he goes on to state again, in the circumstances and having regard to the foregoing as Speaker of the National Assembly, I have no power to restrict or deny the Honourable Member Clement Rohee from speaking or in any way fulfilling his ministerial duties and responsibilities in so far as they relate to this House’.
Nandlall said these are absolute positions, and cannot disintegrate with a substantive motion coming before the Assembly to stop the minister from speaking, because the Speaker is saying unconditionally, unequivocally, unambiguously, that he has no power, he can find no provision in the law, in the standing order in the Constitution, which would allow him, individually or cumulatively, to prevent Minister Rohee from speaking.
“No motion can change the Standing Order, the Constitution, the laws of the country; if the laws in their current formulation cannot invest you with the power, how can a motion invest you with the power?” the AG questioned.

A futile exercise
A substantive motion, to stop the minister from speaking will continue to be an impotent exercise, the AG stated as he has done no wrong in the assembly.
“It’s a two-pronged argument; one you have no power in the first place; secondly, he has done no wrong within the precincts of the assembly. All they are saying is that he is incompetent, for all you know with the present construct of the law, it would appear as though a Member of Parliament or a minister of the government can be incompetent and not be removed in the National Assembly, the electorate has to remove him, the electorate has to remove the government or remove the member, not the National Assembly, they didn’t put him there.”

Parliament Building

There are only two people in the National Assembly that can be removed by a process from within the assembly, and they are the Speaker himself and the leader of the opposition, and that is because both of them are products of a process which began and ended in the National Assembly, the AG explained. Pointing out that while both the Speaker and the clerk could refuse to put the motion on the Order Paper, from the floor, using their numerical strength, the opposition can make an application for this motion to be heard, and the Speaker has the power to prevent it from happening.
Nandlall also noted that it is not that the Parliament is not functioning, or the opposition is not functioning, “they are functioning, but they are functioning in a manner to destabilise the government, in a manner to cause discord, public disorder in our country, they are unseating democratic traditions, and democratic institutions, and that is bad, that is horrendous”.He pointed out that ministerial responsibility which is a feature of the British parliamentary system brought up by Alliance For Change’s leader Khemraj Ramjattan is within a system that is largely governed by conventions, which are unwritten, and by which the British regulate their conduct in accordance.He also noted that ministerial responsibility has no configuration in Guyana’s Constitution, but the entire Cabinet does.
“They are violating and disregarding all the laws, all the recognised procedures, all the democratic traditions and institutions, the Constitution. They disregard their own Speaker, their own lawyers and legal advice… these behavioural traits and erratic kind of outbursts cannot be explained as logical. One has to conclude that something is wrong or they simply want elections, and they don’t want to come out in front and say it, so they prefer to break up the whole thing and force us into a position to call elections,” the AG concluded.

Legal what?

Ruminary in Nathoo rum shop

Unruly behaviour
Parliament, the AG said has similar power as the court to find persons in contempt and explained that disrespect in the face of the Parliament constitutes conduct which the Speaker is witnessing himself, which makes it impossible for the Parliament to function, which would bring into disrepute the integrity of the institution of that august body.
“When those acts are committed, the presiding officer, the Speaker of the National Assembly has an inherent power to maintain order and to maintain decorum, rectitude, and maintaining the integrity of the tribunal, the law invests that officer with the power to punish for contempt. There it is the joint opposition has displayed contempt in the face of the Parliament by defying the Speaker’s ruling the first thing, and then disregarding the Speaker’s order for them to restore order in the assembly.”