When contacted yesterday, AFC leader Khemraj Ramjattan said he had no comment to make on the matter at this stage.
He said the management committee of the party and some other leading members would have to meet to discuss the repercussions and implications of the ruling and until then, he would not comment. The meeting should be held by tomorrow afternoon, he said.
Leader of the opposition coalition, APNU, David Granger could not be contacted for comment yesterday as he was said to be at Mashramani celebrations. However, deputy leader of APNU, Dr Rupert Roopnaraine said the coalition would be meeting over the next two days to discuss the issue and he would not want to make any comments prior to their discussion and decision.
On Friday, seven months after an opposition motion of no confidence against Rohee and interminable wrangling in the House and courts, Trotman lifted the gag on Rohee and ruled that he would be able to fully participate in parliamentary life. Trotman’s decision came despite an earlier public position that he would await a ruling of the court on a case brought by Attorney General Anil Nandlall, which had challenged the Speaker’s decision to limit Rohee’s participation in Parliament until the Privileges Commit-tee of Parliament had ruled on the issue.
Trotman’s decision – contained in a 19-page document – cited various Common-wealth precedents of no-confidence motions being passed against ministers but he grounded his final ruling in the need to defend the Constitution’s injunction to uphold the rights of all members and he also made clear that his duty would not be constrained by the courts.
“It is apparent to me that I must uphold the Constitution of Guyana in interpreting this issue.
The exercise of my duty should not be interfered with, or fettered, by the courts, or be determined by the outcome of the issue before the courts; though we are both respectful of, and grateful for, opinions and interpretations provided by the High Court from time to time.
“Nonetheless, the Nation-al Assembly is legally, and intellectually, empowered and capable, to work out its own procedures and settle its own issues,” Trotman said in his ruling.
“By this ruling, the House is notified that the motion in issue, in the name of the Hon Leader of the Opposition, Brig (Ret’d) David A Granger, MSS, MP, though appearing correct in form is, in my considered opinion, against the Constitution, the established practices, principles, customs and privileges of the Hon Member Clement J Rohee, MP this House, and the Westminster parliamentary system that we subscribe to, and practice,” Trotman said.
“Henceforth, I would be recognising in Hon Clement J Rohee, the full and privileged rights guaranteed under the Constitution to a member of the National Assembly, and to that of a minister of the Cabinet,” he declared.
Trotman said that it is his clear and unambiguous intention to recognise Rohee’s right to fully participate in the business of the National Assembly without inhibition, restriction, or reservation. “It is the constitutionally correct position to adopt,” he said adding that as for the motion being in the Committee of Privileges, it shall remain there until members of the Committee indicate their desire to re-commence consideration of the issues.
The opposition’s no-confidence motion against Rohee had stemmed from what the parties described as poor performance.
