THE results of our general and regional elections in November last year brought a new and unprecedented dimension to the political arena whereby the combined political opposition gained a slim majority of one seat.
This raised the hope of greater collaboration and cooperation between the government and opposition. In fact, President Donald Ramotar, on assuming office, immediately began consultations with the parliamentary opposition parties on the way forward.
While having a minority government is unprecedented in Guyana, minority governments have not been uncommon in the Commonwealth, currently and in the past.
Unfortunately, the opposition seems bent on exercising their slight advantage in muscle power by ignoring parliamentary norms and conventions characteristic of Commonwealth democracies, despite their pledge to work with the government in a spirit of cooperation to move the country forward.
The first test of the opposition’s sincerity to their pledge was with the issue of the election of a Speaker/Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly and they failed that test miserably as they completely ignored and disregarded the parliamentary tradition whereby the government holds the post of Speaker and the opposition the post of Deputy Speaker.
By using their combined majority, they grabbed both posts and, perhaps for the first time in history, this happened in a democracy.
The second test was the appointment of the Committee of Selection. In this instance they insisted on a formula which resulted in their dominance, ignoring the convention of proportionality. So while the ruling party, singly, has the largest number of parliamentary seats, another party with fewer seats holds an equal number of members on the Committee, defying all sense of logic and reasonableness.
This trend has continued as the opposition continues to pursue dominance of all the parliamentary committees, prompting the Attorney General, Mr. Anil Nandlall to move to the courts in a bid to halt this unfortunate development.
Perhaps this move to the court on a parliamentary matter is also unprecedented and Guyanese will be anxiously awaiting the ruling on this crucial issue.
“It is contended in the motion on the part of the government that the composition of the committees violates the principle of proportionality,” the Attorney General said.
In Guyana, the electoral system is based on proportionality.
“It is recognised expressly in the constitution and the laws of Guyana…essentially seats are allocated in the National Assembly to the parties that have contested the elections based on the principle of proportionality…the number of votes you get is proportional to the seats that you will receive,” the Attorney General explained.
Indeed, the vital issue here is the principle of proportionality and therefore the arguments of the Attorney General have great merit. But we would have to await the ruling by the court on the issue.
However, a most disconcerting development recently is the continued pursuance of establishing parliamentary committees despite the fact that the matter is before the court.
While there has been no court order restraining the establishment of these committees, common sense should have dictated in the best interest of the running of the National Assembly, the  halting of the process of establishing them.
Mr. Nandlall is of the view that the insistence of the Opposition and the Speaker of the National Assembly on going ahead with the composition of the parliamentary committees, in light of ongoing court proceedings, is highly objectionable.
It seems clear that the opposition is being driven by obsession with majority dominance rather than what is in the best interest of parliamentary business and the national interest.
The final test of the opposition’s sincerity and commitment to cooperation will come when the national budget is presented for passing in the National Assembly.