…Lawyers advise Clerk of the National Assembly
In the absence of the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), any other Member of the Committee inclusive of those on the governing side could be elected to chair but only for a day, Victoria Law Chambers’ Attorney-at-Law Keavon Bess has advised the Clerk of the National Assembly, Sherlock Isaacs.
The Clerk of the Assembly had turned to the Victoria Law Chambers for Legal Advice after the Chairman of the PAC, David Patterson, during the last two Meetings of the Committee, vacated his post to pave way for the Committee to vote on a Motion of Confidence brought against him by the Government. However, the Committee was left in limbo when none of the other Opposition Members of Parliament opted to take up the post, thereby preventing the motion being put to a vote and the work of the Committee coming to a standstill.
“It is our opinion that because of the importance of the Public Accounts Committee, the framers of the Standing Orders of the National Assembly of Guyana did not intend for the works and functions of the said Committee to be stymied by the actions of the Chairperson or the main Opposition in the Assembly.
Further, in using the wide literal interpretation of Standing Order 95(4) if the Chairperson is unable to be present at any meeting or resigns from the position of Chairperson, the Committee shall elect another Chairperson from among its members, inclusive of the members from the governing party, but their tenure of office shall be for the day of his or her election or the day of the meeting,” the Legal Counsel advised the Clerk, in a recent correspondence.
In requesting legal advice, the Clerk of the Assembly had asked the Law Firm whether Standing Order 95(4) overrides Standing Order 82(2), whereby a Member, who is not a Member of the main Opposition in the National Assembly, in the absence of the Chairperson, can be elected Chairperson of the Public Accounts Committee.
Bess, in response, made it clear that Standing Order 95(4), in his opinion, is not a permanent solution and therefore does not override Standing Order 82(2), which stipulates that the Chairperson of the PAC must be an elected Member of the Opposition.
“Standing Order 95 (4) merely provides a temporary solution to the absence of the Chairperson but at any time the main Opposition may bring that tenure and “election of convenience” to an end by appointing a Chairperson from its member,” Bess further explained.
In arriving at his position, Bess had relied heavily on the Standing Orders of the National Assembly of Guyana, the House of Commons Standing Orders, the 1958 Throne Speech of Queen Elizabeth, Josef Redlich – “the Procedure of the House of Commons,” the Sussex Peerage Case, Heydon’s Case and the DaSilva v. Abrams (1969) case.
Noting that the practice of choosing a Chairman from the Opposition benches dates back to the British Parliament, Bess explained that such a practice is intended for there to be impartiality and a balance of political power in the functioning of the Committee, which is solely responsible for the oversight of the spending of the public purse.
As such, the Attorney submitted that in the event the Chairperson resigns from the position of Chairperson or from the PAC, the next Chairperson must also be a member of the main Opposition in the Assembly.
“It is without doubt that the temporary or daily election of a Chairperson from the governing party in Parliament to chair the meetings of the Public Accounts Committee is conflicting with the intention of Standing Order 82(2) and also goes against the safeguard mechanism as envisage by the framers of the Standing Orders.
However, it may also be interpreted that the framers of the Standing Order did not intend for the functions of the Pubic Accounts Committee to be stalled indefinitely because the Chairperson is unable to be present at Committee meetings for whatever reasons,” he explained.
It was noted that if the work of the PAC is stalled, such would effectively result in the lack of oversight of the government’s spending of the public purse.
Further, to prevent any future absurdity and confusion, the Attorney said it would be prudent for the Parliament to amend Standing Order 82(2) to provide for the resignation of the Chairperson and the election of a replacement in accordance with what is stipulated therein.
