PARLIAMENT  comprises  the President, the Speaker, the Clerk and the National Assembly.

The National Assembly is made up of 65 members who have been elected under a mixed proportional representation electoral system, with 25 seats coming from the 10 administrative geographic regions and 40 from the National Top Up. The Prime Minister is the Leader of the House, and ministers of the Government must be Members of Parliament.
As provided for in the Constitution, the President may appoint an additional four technocratic, non-voting ministers and 2 non-voting parliamentary secretaries to the National Assembly.

The Constitution explicitly defines and provides for the division of power between the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches.
The PPP had always intended to revise the Constitution, except that the process, which was time-consuming and lengthy, had been placed on the back-burner while the new government invested all its time, energies and resources trying to put Guyana back on its socio-economic track, because the needs of the people were paramount, and extant in urgent ways in every sector. It was an Herculean task to even put a dent in the then countrywide devastation that the PNC had left in this country; but their murderous and destructive rampage through Hoyte’s ‘slo’fiah, mo’ fiah’ strategy, which razed dozens of businesses; destroyed private and public properties; wantonly robbed and slaughtered innocent citizens, especially entrepreneurs and policemen,  and even babies asleep in their beds; and butchered a sitting minister of government and his family, forced the government to curtail developmental imperatives and bend to the opposition’s will; as Dr. Jagan was forced to do with Duncan Sandys when the nefarious X-13 Plan was unleashed on his people.

Member states of CARICOM which shared, at heads-of-state level,  a buddy-buddy relationship with Burnham, and at governmental level with the PNC, although it was widely known that the PNC was keeping itself in power through rigged elections combined with internal terrorism, never once interceded to provide support to Dr. Jagan’s just cause during that legendary 28 years of despotic PNC rule. But their intercession when the PNC was on its ‘slo’ fiah, mo’ fiah’ rampage was mainly on the PNC’s behalf, and it forced concessions inimical to the interests of the PPP/C administration; which again, as in the Duncan Sandys farce, was forced to make concessions inimical to its own interests – such as a two-year truncation in its term of office.
Consequent upon these concessions, the 1999-2001 broad-based Constitutional Reform Commission and the resulting constitutional reforms were unanimously agreed to by the parliamentary political parties, through an extensive inclusive consultative process that included communities across the 10 administrative regions and civil society. This was then followed by an intensive parliamentary reform process (2002-2006) which created an expanded committee system and enhanced oversight of all facets of government, supported by revised Standing Orders in both 2006 and 2011.  Thus was created one of the best parliamentary models in the world, which gave the parliamentary opposition great sway and great say in the governance of the country, especially in economic affairs, through the Public Accounts Committee, the permanent chair of which the government conceded to the opposition, even when the PPP/C had the majority in Parliament.  This was a perfect model for shared governance, because every minister, including the prime minister, and head of every governmental institution and department was subject to minute scrutiny by these parliamentary committees.

However, all these constitutional norms and processes, including the Parliamentary Standing Orders, have been violated in a multiplicity of ways over the last year, which has now made the National Assembly a farcical and comical blot on the landscape of such august Houses anywhere in the world.

A GINA-released report states: “Since the convening of the 10th Parliament, on January 12, 2012, by His Excellency President Donald Ramotar, the Guyana Constitution, parliamentary norms and conventions, and the Standing Orders of the Guyana Parliament have been under constant threat by Opposition action taken as a result of their one-seat majority”.  

The unprecedented events of November 22, 2012 are no less than anarchy in the highest law-making forum in the land, condoned and even encouraged by the Speaker, AFC co-founder Raphael Trotman; whose office dictates that he remains impartial at all times, but who has instead subverted, bastardized, and prostituted the Parliament of Guyana by unconscionably showing partiality to his own party and  APNU, to which the AFC has now unapologetically become affiliated, through rulings that unpardonably hold the government to ransom, so that it has to resort   to the courts for justice, at great cost to the taxpayers of Guyana.

The first power play by the joint opposition, wielding its combined one-seat majority like a sword of vengeance in the National Assembly, saw the two parties annexing both positions of Speaker and Deputy Speaker; which contravenes all parliamentary norms and practices.
 
Parliamentary Committees now a weapon to destroy Government
The Parliamentary bullyism continued unabated, and the government reported, inter alia: “At the February 10th sitting, the members of the Standing Committee of Selection were nominated on the floor of the House by both Government and Opposition parties. The two Opposition parties, by motion, reduced the size of the Committee from 10 members with the Speaker as chair to 9, with 4 for the Government and 5 (4 APNU and 1 AFC) for the Opposition, with the Speaker as the chair. This was voted on and adopted by majority vote of one.

Since then, the accepted norms and practices of the Committee of Selection have been under attack, and its function (has been) grossly compromised.

At the first meeting of the Committee of Selection, chaired by the Speaker on February 24, 2012, the combined Opposition parties used their majority on the committee to establish new rules on the composition of the parliamentary committees.

The Parliamentary Opposition ruled that, based on what they called the “new dispensation in the National Assembly”, the Opposition would have the majority of seats on all committees, and the number of seats on each committee, unless otherwise specified, would be reduced from 10 to 9 seats. They proposed a formula of 4-4-1, and voted by majority for 9 seats on all committees, with 4 for the PPP/C (with 49.3% of the electorate), 4 for  APNU (with 40% of the electorate) and 1 for the A.F.C. (with 10.3 % of the electorate).

The government had also made a proposal at the meeting for parity on the committees, based on the new situation in the National Assembly, of five seats for the government and five seats for the combined opposition, 4 for APNU.and  one for the A.F.C. The Government argued that its proposal was closer to the electoral results than the combined Opposition’s proposal. However, this was rejected. With that, by vote of a majority, the government’s representation on all committees, which the Standing Orders provided for as “no less than 6, no more than 10 members”, was now reduced to a minority.

In fact, the combined opposition parties now have a disproportional 54% representation on the 9-member committees, which they neither individually (40% APNU with 26 seats, and 10% AFC with 7 seats) nor collectively attained at the polls, and the government has 40 % of the representation on the committees, which is below its 49.2% of the polls.
 
On March 13, 2012, the Speaker proceeded to hold the first meeting of the appointed committees, to elect the chairpersons, who, other than those chaired by the Speaker, became controlled by the A.P.N.U., the major opposition party.

It was apparent to everyone that the farce being enacted at every session in Parliament, over the last year, was fully rehearsed at secretive extra-parliamentary sessions by the joint opposition, then played out in the National Assembly, with the House becoming a parliamentary theatre; because almost all of their actions were in discord with the Constitution and/or standard parliamentary norms and conventions.
    
Unlike the dynamism that prevailed when parliamentary committees were convened, and most especially chaired by the government before the elections of 2011, parliamentary committees of the current dispensation — even those chaired by the Speaker — are either not functioning, or doing so in a desultory, lackadaisical manner; which goes to prove that they  wanted only power, but not the responsibility and hard work that go with it.
 
Anarchy in House escalating
Even the time-honoured parliamentary practice and Standing Orders  provisions that allow the government to independently set the date for sittings have been overturned when the joint Opposition, on March 15, 2012, voted down the Prime Minister when he set a date for the next sitting, via a motion tabled and seconded by  APNU
Important bills tabled by government vital to national welfare.
     
Almost every ruling, and at each parliamentary sitting, the joint opposition seems bent on stymieing national development in one way or another, and the government’s report continues: “As provided for by the Constitution, the Minister of Finance is allowed to utilise monies from the Contingency Fund in certain prescribed circumstances, including between the period of dissolution of the Parliament for elections and its reconvening; and is required to bring these Supplementary Financial Papers (SPs) as soon as the National Assembly is reconstituted.

“The Minister of Finance, Dr. Ashni Singh, tabled two Supplementary Financial Papers (SPs) on February 10, 2012. On February 16, 2012, during the debate on these SPs, APNU and the AFC withheld approval or negativized a number of sub-heads on one of the papers, thus leaving a charge of Gy $79 M unauthorised. More interesting is that the Opposition parties did not submit to the normal procedures required to bring amendments to these SPs. Despite efforts by the government in writing to the Speaker and on the floor of the House, the Speaker allowed these actions to proceed.

“Normal parliamentary convention does not support leaving a charge on the Contingency Fund. One SP was passed as amended. The second paper was postponed after a motion by two APNU and AFC members to withdraw the paper was put in abeyance by the Speaker.

The Speaker declared, at the end of the sitting, that he would allow the minister to return to the House with another SP for the items where expenditure was not authorised.
 “At the March 15, 2012 sitting, the Speaker, in response to the government’s protests about the treatment of the first SP not being in order by parliamentary convention and norms, ruled that the treatment of the first paper, despite leaving a charge on the Contingency Fund, was in order. The second paper was passed by 31 for, 26 opposed, and 7 declined to vote.

The Minister of Finance then returned to the National Assembly, on June 14, 2012, to address the outstanding charge of $79 M by way of a Supplementary Financial Paper, and after much wrangling and procedural arguments, the Speaker allowed the SP to be again considered and again not approved.”       

Thus their ploy of starving the government of funds to do developmental works and enhance the social paradigm was revealed through these vindictive acts, notwithstanding the fact that these monies were used to provide increases to public servants and police ranks; for payments to elections field staff, and additional expenditures for the Police Force for the duration it was in lying; to alleviate flooding  in Regions 5 and 6; to run the country while Parliament was prorogued; and to provide other necessary social services in the country, including land development for the specialty hospital meant to provide tertiary care at affordable prices to patients with life-threatening illnesses.
 
Non-cooperation with Government’s tripartite arrangements and the Budget fiasco
That the joint Opposition wanted total control of Government, and not be a mere adjunct to government, was even more apparent with its almost virtual boycott of the several committees and sub-committees to address issues of governance established by the President in efforts to break the impasse and enable the country to move forward.

Converse to the composition of the parliamentary committees, each party had equal representation, yet there was little to no co-operation by the opposition with these initiatives.

On the eve of the debate on the Estimates, the AFC MP Ramjattan and the APNU MP Carl Greenidge brought motions, on the night of April 17th, to cut the Budget Sub-Heads for the employment of contracted workers in the Office of the President; the Ministries of Education, Housing and Water, Health, Labour, Human Services and Social Security.
    
Alerted by the media following a hastily-called press conference by the government, 500 public servants, including staff from the Parliament Office – most of them Opposition supporters — held peaceful picketing exercises in front of the Parliament Building against the proposed cuts by the Opposition on the following day, April 18, forcing a withdrawal of these motions by the joint opposition at the April 18th sitting.       

A question without notice to the Minister of Finance by an APNU.Member of Parliament, at the same April 17, 2012 sitting, sought to know whether the request by APNU for a meeting to discuss the 2012 Budget was assented to by Government, with the proviso that the Opposition made available in writing the list of issues it wished to discuss.

The Government of Guyana (GoG), headed by the President with his delegation, and the Leader of the Opposition (LOP) and Leader of A Partnership for National Unity, (APNU), Mr. David Granger, with his delegation held meetings from April 18-24, 2012 to try to reach agreement on the 11 issues raised by the LOP, in order to reach agreement on the 2012 Budget. The then AFC Leader, Mr. Ramjattan, refused at first to be part of the talks,  but eventually joined the meetings on April 23, 2012.
At the first meeting, convened on April 18, 2012, the Government agreed to A.P.N.U.’s proposal for an increase in the monthly rates of the universal, non-contributory Old Age Pension. The Government’s caveat to the agreement was that it would expect the A.P.N.U. to support the additional charge of over Gy$1 billion on the Budget. On the said day, the Minister of Finance announced the increase at the sitting of the National Assembly.

Additionally, agreement was reached, on April 19, 2012, between the GoG and A.P.N.U. for a reduction, in a staggered way, in the subsidy for electricity supplied to Administrative Region 10, and specifically to the township of Linden.
At the all-day April 22, 2012 meeting between the two sides, progress had appeared to have been made, and a draft press release was prepared to that effect.    
The Hon. Prime Minister, Mr. Samuel Hinds, with the full concurrence of the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. David Granger, and Dr. Rupert Roopnaraine of  A.P.N.U. (who were shown a copy of the statement before it was read to the National Assembly), announced the agreement at the sitting of April 19, 2012.

On the following day, April 20, 2012, leaders of the A.F.C. travelled to Linden and, with A.P.N.U. leaders from the region, opposed any reduction in the subsidy for electricity. The Leader of the Opposition also travelled to Linden, and, at a meeting there, reneged on the agreement reached on April 19, 2012.  

Subsequent actions by the AFC and PNC/APNU precipitated a literal and figurative inferno at Linden, and later Agricola, that left several persons dead, many private and public properties destroyed, and many ordinary citizens — including children — traumatised for life because of assaults on their persons.

On the following day, April 23, 2012, A.P.N.U. and A.F.C. MPs tabled motions to cut the Budget by over Gy$20 billion. The draft press release was not agreed to by the two opposition parties, and was never released. Talks between the two sides on the nights of April 23 and 24, 2012 failed to reach agreement; and, in fact, reversed what progress had been made with the entrance of the A.F.C delegation.

The Opposition motions to reduce the 2012 Budget were tabled and voted on by majority at the April 25 and 26, 2012 sittings.
The Appropriation Bill for Budget 2012 was passed as amended, with massive cuts of Gy $ 20.9 billion, on April 26th 2012. Most telling are those government agencies which were reduced — the Office of the President; the Guyana Elections Commission; the Guyana Power and Light; the Ministry of Finance’s Low Carbon Development Strategy programme; the State Planning Secretariat;  the Customs Anti-Narcotics Unit (CANU) and the Ethnic Relations Commission, one of four constitutional rights commissions.

Government resorted to the judiciary, and the High Court ruled in the Government’s favour, stating that the Opposition-controlled National Assembly acted outside its constitutional remit in imposing the cuts to the 2012 Budget.

In keeping with the court ruling on the budget cuts, on August 9th, the Minister of Finance returned to the House, requesting approval for expenditures under supplementary provisions, in keeping with the court order. This attempt was partially successful; but, this time, funding of the original heads, which were reduced on April 25, 2012 for the Office of the President, were reduced to 0, immediately prior to the commencement of the recess of the first session of the 10th Parliament.
 
House made a mockery
Unconstitutionally-crafted and drafted bills, motions, et cetera were brought in a continuum of fruitless and time-wasting (money-wasting also) exercises that eventuated in the gagging of Home Affairs Minister Clement Rohee, thus forcing the Government to once more resort to the courts, again a time and money-wasting exercise impelled by the unconstitutional actions of the joint Opposition.
     
“AFC Leader Khemraj Ramjattan inadvertently revealed the Opposition’s ultimate objective when he threatened in Parliament, addressing the Government ministers, that the Opposition will remove them “…one by one.”
 “The Government reports state in part: “Most disturbing was that the Speaker, by his ruling to prevent an M.P. from speaking, overturned his own ruling on November 8, 2012, and allowed the Opposition parties to succeed with their publicly declared agenda of “gagging” the minister as a Member of Parliament.

“It is significant to note that, prior to this sitting, the Leader of the Opposition had publicly declared that the A.P.N.U. were mulling over how to “get rid of Rohee”.       

“This statement triggered a letter to the Speaker from the Government, cautioning about such statements and the minister’s safety. The Speaker made light of this in his response, saying that the LOP was an honourable man and he was sure no harm to the minister’s person was meant.” Honourable? Really? By what definition?
 
The real intentions behind the joint Opposition’s masquerade
The politically orchestrated and driven disturbances organised and lead by extreme and fringe elements of  A.P.N.U. and the A.F.C., along with other bodies, to create political instability and reverse the gains that Guyana has made has caused much dislocation in the country, and the Government explains as follows:

“The Government wishes to emphasise that the prolonged period of 36 days of protest and occupation of township which severed the country into two would not have been possible without the complicity of the leaders of the two Opposition parties to not tone down the rhetoric and call off the protests, as well as the advocacy and misinformation spread by certain media and social networking sites, all linked to the opposition parties or known advocates of these political parties.

“Following the August 22, 2012 signed agreement between the Government and the Linden representatives, at a public meeting on August 24, 2012, which was addressed by A.P.N.U. and A.F.C. leaders in Linden, the following was stated:-

Reverend Morian, A.P.N.U. M.P., disclosed that the struggle continued, and encouraged persons to stay mobilised for instructions from the Chairman’s office. He went on to say that once the “Government refused to release monies for development(al) purposes in the region, the protest (would) continue”. Mr. Solomon, Regional Chairman and A.P.N.U. member, stated that “the struggle was not over until implementations were seen, and residents must be prepared to take to the streets in their thousands within two weeks if the Government failed to commence implementing the agreements. He disclosed that he had spoken with some top brass military commanders, who mentioned that it would have been the first time that the military was so extended within a community… From his intelligence, over 400 military officers were deployed to Linden… He posited that Lindeners would now be better prepared to deal with the Joint Services should the need occur.”

“It is a moot point that the misinformation presented to the public following the signing of the agreement by Mr. Solomon was debunked by the Joint Services’ own statement to the COI.
   
 “At a recent public meeting in the month of November in Linden, addressed by the LOP and members of A.P.N.U., exhortations were made for the community to be prepared for the possibility of ‘pepperpot protests (ppp) in December and into the new year’.
 
Agricola
“On the evening of October 8, 2012, the A.F.C. leadership, at a press conference, issued an ultimatum to the President to remove the Minister of Home Affairs within 48 hours.

“On October 11th, 2012, on the East Bank Highway in the vicinity of Agricola village, protesters — some imported from outside the community — blocked the main thoroughfare into and out of the capital city, Georgetown, with connections to two other regions at rush hour. Vehicles and debris were used to block the highway on all four lanes, and fires were set.

Thousands of commuters, including school children, were trapped in a small area with no way to turn. Citizens were attacked and robbed, and hundreds of vehicles were unable to move for over seven hours. Thousands of citizens, including school children who lived across the Demerara River, walked back to Georgetown to try to reach the boats at the ferry stelling, and were also robbed. The police were physically assaulted and abused by the protesters.

“A.F.C. was the key instigator of this disturbance, and when exposed, the LOP,  A.P.N.U. and the A.F.C. blamed the police and the Minister of Home Affairs.
Again, on October 15th and 16th, at rush hour, the protesters attempted to block the highway, and succeeded in blocking two of the four lanes. This resulted in the backing up of traffic, and some vehicles were attacked and damaged by protesters. The police again were abused, but the situation was finally brought under control.  
 
“The public (has) been angered by this extremist behaviour, and (has) condemned such action.

“The Linden disturbances and the Agricola protests are disturbing indications of the level of extremism and irresponsible and reckless leadership that is taking over the political environment in Guyana.”

Role of the Social Media
“Another most ominous development has arisen in this period, whereby Guyanese citizens are being targeted for their political persuasion and their ethnicity. Incitement to violence against Guyanese of Indian descent (the largest ethnic minority) was being promoted on social media such as Facebook and Twitter.  

“Elements of the media supportive of the Opposition parties were also involved in the incitement of racial hostility and the spread of misinformation.  For instance, on one of the influential online media outlets, Demerara Waves, a blog posting calling for the mass murder of Guyanese citizens of Indian descent was not blocked or removed.    
“An Internet radio owned by Mark Benschop, a man who was charged for treason for the assault on the Office of the President in 2002, and who was subsequently pardoned by the President in 2009, also posted race hate and misinformation.

“Both online media outlets are (additionally) responsible for the violence and burnings which erupted in Linden in the early hours of August 10, when they misinformed Lindeners that the Joint Services were in Linden and (were) instructed by the President “to shoot to kill.”    

“A list of supporters of the governing party from the Linden area, with their photographs, was circulated online in order to facilitate the targeting of these persons during the Linden protests. Most were forced to go into hiding. The Headquarters of the PPP in Linden was attacked and partially burnt, and properties of party members were robbed. One of the female supporters found that her photograph and that of her young child, together with their address and telephone number, were posted on Facebook, and she had been labelled a PPP informant.

“Even at this time of writing, the blog sites and websites of known opposition personalities, such as OneVoicecanWin and Brutalfacts, continue to try to fuel and create more “Lindens”, and “openly call for the Government to be brought to its knees.”

Fanning the flames of ethnic insecurities, and promoting racial hostility and racial hatred and conflict are particularly reprehensible in a multi-ethnic society such as Guyana, which has made steady progress over the years in overcoming the bitter legacy of racial antagonism which was sown in earlier times.”
    
In conclusion, the Government report states: “These developments in the Guyana National Assembly over the last 11 months are at their least disturbing and worrying.
However, they become more sinister when taken holistically with the consistent undermining and subversion of parliamentary democracy, based on “the dictatorship of one” and repeated declarations of the “new dispensation” by the two opposition parties that their supporters are the majority, and they must have their day.

“Examined together with the Linden disturbances (July 18-August 22, 2012), the Agricola protests (October 11, 15 and 16, 2012), and continuous attempts to have similar such road blockages in other areas (which in contrast have had little success thus far), threats of more protests, the targeting of ethnic groups, and threats against individuals in Government and anyone who publicly defends the Government in the social media, the Government of Guyana, by way of this document, is convinced that Guyana is under threat.”

The Government has appealed for international intervention to prevent anarchy in the land and a consequential reversal of the gains made post elections of 1992.

The protection of parliamentary democracy and the legitimacy of a democratically elected Government.
In the meantime, the theatrics continue in the National Assembly, at great cost to taxpayers, forestalling many developmental programmes, impeding others, and costing this country much wasted resources, time, and money.  At the end of the day, it is the ordinary man in the street who has to bear the consequences of the joint Opposition’s grandstanding and subversive actions.