ONLY the President can remove Home Affairs Minister Clement Rohee from office. This was the blunt declaration by Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Mr. Anil Nandlall.
He was at the time making a short but fiery presentation in the National Assembly last Wednesday evening, at the commencement of debate on the Opposition’s no-confidence motion against Minister Rohee.
Nandlall, quoting from the Constitution, alluded to Article 183, which clearly states on what grounds such an official can be removed.
The Attorney General said he recognised that what transpired in Linden on July 18 last, when three protestors were shot and killed, is a tragedy that is beyond disputation.
“The President, exercising powers which reside in him under the Commission of Inquiry Act, committed himself to the establishment of a Commission to inquire into this tragedy…only the Commission of Inquiry could determine the Home Affairs Minister responsible,” the Attorney General argued.
He explained that the motion in its entirety is one that “pre-empts, prejudices and undermines” the integrity of a process to which parties would have committed themselves, as the call is being made for Minister Rohee to resign and for the members of the National Assembly to vote that they have no confidence in him.
“The legal truth of the matter is that Mr. Rohee does not hold office due to the confidence of this Assembly…a Minister is appointed under the constitution by the President…he comes here as an elected official…therefore, only the President can remove him,” Minister Nandlall said.
He added that by making such a calling for the Minister of Home Affairs to go, indicates that there is a conclusion that he is responsible. However, that decision is to be made by the Commission of Inquiry.
“We can speak here in this parliament from now till thy kingdom come but, the fact remains that the National Assembly has no power of removal of a minister,” the Attorney General posited.
President Donald Ramotar had announced that a full investigation will be launched into the fatal shooting of three Linden protestors and during a meeting with the opposition, Region 10 Chairman and the private sector, an agreement was reached to have a Commission of Inquiry investigate the July 18 events in the mining town.
“Article 183 of the constitution speaks to Ministers and it says how ministers are to be removed from office – a minister having been appointed by the President cannot be removed by the National Assembly…the National Assembly has no power to remove Minister Rohee…the National Assembly has no power in law or under the constitution to remove Minister Rohee from office,” the Legal Affairs Minister explained.
Further, Article 184 of the Constitution is the only article within it that speaks about the ‘no confidence’ of any official in the National Assembly, and that official is the leader of the opposition.

Relationship with Police
On the issue of the Minister of Home Affairs and his relationship with the Police, Minister Nandlall explained that it is guided by Section 7 of the Police Act.
“…the Commissioner shall, subject to the general orders and direction of the Minister, have the command and superintendence of the Force and he shall be responsible to the minister for the peace and good order through Guyana for the efficient administration and government of the force…and for the proper expenditure of all public monies appropriated for the service there-of…that is the relationship between the Minister and the police commissioner…the minister has an overall supervisory control…he cannot direct the day to day operations of the Force,” Minister Nandlall said.
He urged the National Assembly not to fall prey to carry out such a futile exercise and quoted a paragraph from a Commission of Inquiry Report of the Disciplined Forces Commission which was unanimously accepted by the House years ago.
“Since the statutory powers of the minister relate to an executive function and responsibility, the power to issue general orders and directions to the commissioner is necessarily limited to general orders and direction of an executive nature and, not a power to issue general orders and directions which involve encroachment on the powers of the commissioner to command and superintend the Guyana Police Force,” the Attorney General read.
He questioned that having regard to this statutory relationship therefore, on what basis is the motion seeking to indict the minister.
“The point is that while we remain committed to ensure that those who are responsible for the tragedy at Linden is brought to justice- that is our commitment as a government…we are prepared to embark upon the extended procedures to which we would have committed ourselves…we must await the outcome of that process because it is out of that process we will determine whether anyone or who will be charged and for what offence…everything outside of that is pre-emptive and prejudicial,” Nandlall said.
“I appeal to the National Assembly not to colour our reason and objectivity with passions and emotions. We, as the National Assembly, pass laws for the people of this country to obey; we set up processes to which we expect them to subject themselves in the established institutions to which we assign responsibilities and powers to deal with certain issues – the judiciary – we established to deal with the guilt of persons charged with criminal offences. In this case, we have set up a Commission of Inquiry to determine who is responsible for the Linden tragedy. We cannot, ourselves, undermine it and determine in this parliament who is responsible or who is not. We have to allow that commision to do so. If we do otherwise then we are telling the people of this country to deal with the persons whom they feel are guilty of offences which they feel those persons have committed. If that is our position then we may as well abolish the court system,” Minister Nandlall stated.
Speaker of the National Assembly Raphael Trotman allowed the APNU’s no confidence motion, notwithstanding the fact that the requisite notice period in bringing the motion to the House, was not adhered to.