THE National Assembly witnessed a heated debate in the early hours of Friday morning, as the opposition sought to table a motion titled ‘Restriction on the right to assemble.’ The motion was eventually sent to a Special Select Committee for review and consultations. The motion seeks the following; that the National Assembly declares that the right of citizens to assemble and to demonstrate peacefully should not be hindered by the Guyana Police Force (GPF) or any other agency or institution of state; the Guyana Police Force should relocate its barricades so as to allow freedom of assembly within a closer proximity of the National Assembly, Public Buildings; and the Parliament Office to make arrangements for the broadcast of the National Assembly sittings in the environs of the National Assembly.
Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall in speaking to the motion said that it raises the very important issue of the fundamental right to assemble which is guaranteed by the constitution and finds expression in Article 147.
“I have listened to the mover of the motion…emphasis is deliberately placed on only one aspect of the constitution…that is the one that states the right…every right has limitations so does article 147, which says that nothing contained in or done under the authority of any law shall be held to be inconsistent with or in contravention of this article to the extent that the law in question makes provisions; that is reasonable required in the interest of defence; public safety, public order, public morality or public health and; that is reasonably required for the protecting the rights or freedoms of other persons,” Nandlall said.
He added that a man’s fundamental rights and freedoms must not violate the fundamental rights and freedoms of others, which was eloquently put by the Chief Justice in India, in Jaan Bahadur vs the Principal of Mahendra College, when he said that the right to move freely throughout the territory of the union of India, did not confer the right to walk over other people’s property.
The Legal Affairs Minister pointed out that taking into consideration known and established philosophical settings, the House must look at the limitations which Article 147 impose on the right to Assemble.
“The police Act under the Authority of a Law which is the Police Act Chapter 16:01…subsection two of that Act says that the force- shall be employed for the prevention and detection of crime, the preservation of law and order, the preservation of peace, the repression of internal disturbances, the protection of property, amongst others…the statutory basis is in place for the erection and installation of those barriers,” Minister Nandlall said.
He believes that whilst he understands the general thrust of the need to make the work of parliament more accessible, more sophisticated ways should be found to do so.
“Imagine you would have heard the Honourable Attorney General booming at 01:50 in the morning…we would have gotten an injunction…we have to be wary of all the factors…we must not rush to make decisions about these things…the barricades are not there as a result of a government policy but rather it is there for the safety of all parliamentarians and those who traverse it,” Minister Nandlall explained.
PPP/C MP Labour, Manzoor Nadir in addressing the motion explained that while all parliamentarians are concerned that no citizen is hindered from his/her right to assemble, associate, speak or get information, parliamentarians must uphold the principle that says ‘while you enjoy your rights to a democracy, you do not have the right to prevent other people from enjoying their rights’.
Nadir added that the issue of access to the decision making bodies of a state (parliament) is nothing strange.
“I do not see Mr. Speaker that the overwhelming majority of the people of this country will be getting their information from parliament by a loud speaker outside of the House,” Nadir said.
He added that the issue of security in the National Assembly on the days of the sitting has to take on serious significant and top priority for the Guyana Police Force, whilst it is causing inconvenience to some people, the world over, where there is parliament and serious decisions are made, similar situations exist.
Minister of Home Affairs, Clement Rohee said that a motion of this nature ought not to be won by numbers but by the force of arguments.
The Home Affairs Minister is of the belief that the opposition is asking for the removal of the barricades so that their supporters can line off outside of Parliament, however this can backfire at them.
“We sometimes have to be more futuristic in our thinking…this short sighted view open up the place let the people come…can backfire on them…this motion is misconceived,” Minister Rohee said.
AFC MP, Moses Nagamootoo said that there is no law that bans protest outside of Parliament as such; one has to be very careful when they come to take away a freedom provided for under the constitution.
Mover of the Motion, Desmond Trotman believes that such a motion is needed as it gives full access to the House by the public in a direct manner, as such the present practice of making it difficult for the ordinary citizen to do same while it is in session is itself a restriction of citizenship.
This, he believes is a problem that needs to be addressed as democracy is not to be confined to elected officials but, to be duly accorded to the rightful custodians of power who are the people.