Judiciary decision on Rohee creates domino effect to uphold his rights

January 20, 2013 | By | Filed Under Letters 

Dear Editor,
“Chief Justice Ian Chang found that Minister of Home Affairs Clement Rohee as an elected member has a right to speak in the National Assembly”  but according to the report of SN of  1/12/12  headlined  “Rohee can speak in Parliament but…”,  some doubt  is  now created that  the Chief Justice   decision “ does not appear to be enforceable by the court”.
What is in so doubtful or vague about the Honourable Chief Justice’s  ruling? Assertions  or doubts that  the Chief Justice has only  validated   a Guyanese  Minister  with half  of his rights and denied him the other half  could bring into question  whether he is half human being.
Could it be because  he is of mixed race?. So to which half is the  PNC’s shadow Attorney General Mr Basil Williams  denying or affording  legitimacy to  the Home Minister?
So much putrid hogwash surrounds assertions  that  Minister Rohee can speak as a member of parliament but not comply with his other duties as Home Affairs  Minister.
The Minister derives his authority as a Minister of Guyana by  legal appointment from the constitutionally elected President of  Guyana and not by that of his fellow parliamentarians.
The Opposition cannot deprive the Minister of that  which the electorate  and not parliamentarians   have originally empowered in  free and fair elections.
In seeking  to “take away”  the  rights of a lawful  Minister  the opposition  would be guilty of  mugging a parliamentarian  and stealing that what is his ie  causing him injury combined with naked corruption in broad daylight.  Minister Rohee is also of mixed race, male, a loyal, respected and popular outstanding PPP member, a father, a husband, with  a home to maintain as well as being a natural born citizen of his country.
Does such aforementioned acquired concomitant  duties become  nullified  similar to the spurious claims that he has lost the right to comply with his Home Affairs Minister  responsibilities?  Such  is the Opposition  absurdity which would limit  the Minister to be one  but not the other(s),  and have no foundation just as they are palably baseless.
Recall PNC triumphalism in 1997 when Chief Justice Desiree Bernard issued an Order nisi of certiorai challenging the decision of the Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission, Mr Doodnauth Singh, to declare Mrs Janet Jagan the President of Guyana without the consent of the members of the  Guyana Elections Commission and to quash the Chairman’s decision on constitutional grounds?
Mrs Janet Jagan had already been sworn in as  President of Guyana in a secret ceremony held on Friday 19 December 1997. Chief Justice Bernard also issued an Order nisi of prohibition ( as compared to certiorai) prohibiting the Chancellor of the Judiciary, Mr Cecil Kennard, from swearing in Mrs Jagan as President and an Order nisi of prohibition, prohibiting her from assuming the office of President at the State House function with invited guests.  President Jagan was served with the court order at her residence long after the  earlier secret ceremony and in disgust tossed the papers over her shoulders.
What did it matter; President Jagan’s swearing in at State House was only a ceremonial  public formality as she had already been privately sworn in earlier by Chancellor Kennard. Chief Justice Bernard’s  ruling was nevertheless still  legally binding even though made after the fact.
Now Chief Justice Chang’s decision has in effect created a domino effect guaranteeing all Minister Rohee’s constitutional rights.
There is a separation of powers all right between the legislative, executive and the judiciary, but its  a counterbalance to each other’s excesses not to be a hindrance.
For anyone to argue  that Chief Justice Chang ruling on the executive violates the separation of powers would nullify that it is the legislature  which  constitutionally instructs the executive,  and like the above two cases the judiciary can impact  the executive.
Chief Justice Chang correctly  also  affirmed that the judiciary has authority to decide  whenever the Guyana constitution is violated by whomever.
The judiciary interprets the law , enforces and protects it.  The constitution is the highest authority of the land and cannot be violated even by parliamentarians. Which in this case validates  his authority to judge   the Minister of Home Affairs Mr Clement Rohee with  all legal rights to speak in the legislature  since the constitution of Guyana as the highest law of the land  so empowers  both men by its prescriptive unambiguous  guarantees.
Only the Speaker can legally censure a member of parliament but Minister Rohee has done nothing wrong requiring punishment.  The Privileges Committee is only a deliberative and recommending committee with the PNC/AFC in majority. By being both the prosecutor and a judge the Opposition would be again infringing on Minister Rohee’s right to a free and fair trial in committee without any charges of wrongdoing.
With the Minister also being a member of the committee he in effect is both the accused and a judge compliments of Guyana’s opposition comical madness! No experienced  lawyer like Speaker Raphael Trotman, would attempt to execute a flawed decision from the Committee of Privileges which  already stinks, since it would be prejudicial  and flawed on many counts to the “ non-accused” i.e. Minister Rohee.  Guyana’s constitution still guarantees a free and fair trail to all.
No crime was committed simply because the Home Minister was not culpable in issuing any direct orders to shoot lawless marauding Lindeners.
What then is the legitimate basis by which Minister Rohee can be automatically punished by an opposition no confidence motion?
Can any morality or defense uphold the lawlessness of AFC inspired protestors at Linden, Agricola included, who were unfairly bullying for    continued entitlement to pay substantially less for electricity whiles all Guyanese nationwide were paying considerably more?
The PNC can only have commendable good reasons in distancing itself from the AFC’s Nigel Hughes in preventing him from speaking at a Linden rally last weekend. Little by little Guyanese may be seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. This can only be good for refreshing stability and harmony in Guyana.
Sultan Mohamed

If you find a comment distasteful or inappropriate, you can flag the comment and send us a report for immediate removal. Send report to kaieteurnews@yahoo.com
Kaieteur News reserves the rights to moderate any comment deemed inappropriate and is not responsible for the views expressed.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Updated by Kaieteur News Personnel. All Rights Reserved. A GxMedia website solution.