ATTORNEY-General (AG) and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall, has issued a High Court challenge to the no-confidence motion that was moved by A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) Leader, David Granger, and passed in the National Assembly on July 30.

The constitutional notice of motion was filed on September 13, and seeks to have the Opposition’s motion declared “unlawful, a violation of the doctrine of separation of powers, unconstitutional, null, void and without any binding force or effect insofar as it purports to censure and express no-confidence in the Home Affairs Minister.”
The notice made mention of the fact that since the passing of the motion, leaders of both APNU and the Alliance For Change (AFC) have made statements to the effect that the National Assembly will sanction Minister Rohee if the said no-confidence motion is ignored by him and/or the Government.
The no-confidence motion against Minister Rohee is incapable in law or under the constitution of removing him from office. Ministers are appointed by the President of Guyana in accordance with Article 106, and are assigned ministerial portfolios by the Head of State in accordance with Article 107 of the Constitution. Moreover, the Home Affairs Minister is also an elected geographic representative of the Parliament.
Government has held firm to the view that this no-confidence motion is simply an expression of the House’s opinion on a given issue, as it has no binding effect on the Government; and as such, it is unconstitutional and an abuse of the parliamentary process.
The motion was brought to the House subsequent to the protest in Linden over electricity tariffs, which led to the unfortunate killing of three Lindeners. During that time, all parties were engaged in consultations, and a consensus was reached for the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry to launch an investigation into the matter, after which those found to be culpable will be made to face the full brunt of the law.
However, this no-confidence motion was taken to the House before the Commission was even set up, flying in the face of the agreement that was reached.