Submitted by Rickford Burke, President, Caribbean Guyana Institute for Democracy (CGID)

corrected submission

December 24, 2018

Hon. Dr. Bartland Scotland, M.P.

Speaker of the National Assembly

Republic of Guyana

Parliament Buildings

Brickdam, Georgetown

Guyana

Dear Honorable Speaker:

Article 156.3 of the Guyana constitution states that: “A member of the National Assembly elected on a list shall cease to be a member of the Assembly if:

(a)  “He or she declares in writing to the Speaker or to the Representative of the list from which his or her name was extracted that he or she will not support the list from which his or her name was extracted.”

(b)   “He or she declares in writing to the Speaker or to the Representative of the list from which his or her name was extracted, his or her support for another list.” 

Prior to the Constitution Amendment Act of 2007, Article 156.3, an original provision of the constitution, stated that “A Member of the national Assembly elected on a list shall be disqualified from being a member of the Assembly, if he or she in the prescribed manner, declares that he or she will not support the list from which his or her name was extracted or, declares that he or she abstain from supporting that list or, declares his or her support for another list.” This original provision – Article 156.3, was repealed and replaced with the extant provisions of Article 153 by the Constitution Amendment Act of 2007. The amendment, notwithstanding, the fundamental intent of the framers of the constitution remains applicable and paramount to the interpretation of the extant provisions of Article 153.    

The constitution comprises binding rules which govern the organization, powers and administration of government and society. The intent of the framers thereof is the jurisprudential standard for constitutional interpretation.

The framers of the Guyana constitution intended in Article 153 (a) and (b) that a member of the Assembly, elected by the people and extracted from his party’s List, cannot act against, refuse to support nor vote against the List from which he or she was extracted, and neither can a member vote for, with or in support of another List, without first declaring such intent to the Speaker in writing. 

Article 156.3 (a) and (b) consequently mandates that any member who accordingly makes such declaration against the List from which he or she is extracted or in support of another List, shall cease to be a member of the National Assembly. The commission of an act against the List from which a member was extracted as well as an act in support of another List, for which a written declaration was deliberately and deceitfully withheld from the Speaker, likewise violate the provisions of Article 156.3 (a) and (b), and similarly disqualifies such a member immediately from the Assembly; since the intention of the constitution is for the member to fully honor the content of Article 156.3 to the letter.

Evidently, Article 156.3 mandates that before a member acts against the List from which he or she was extracted, or in support of another List, a declaration of that intent must be first submitted to the Speaker, the consequence of which, or the failure to so declare, require nullification of the act by the Speaker and disqualification of the member from the Assembly.

 Article 156.3 therefore safeguards against the government side of the Assembly bringing itself down. It follows therefore, that a public withdrawal of support for the List from which a member was extracted and the public declaration of support for another List, with or without a declaration to the Speaker, automatically triggers or invokes Article 156.3 (a) and (b), and such member shall cease to be a member of the Assembly. 

Honorable, Speaker, on Friday, December, 21, 2018, Mr.Charrandass Persaud, then a member of the Assembly, who was extracted from the APNU+AFC coalition List, voted in favor of the no confidence motion that was tabled in the National Assembly by the parliamentary opposition, against the APNU+AFC coalition government of Guyana, enabling its passage. In so doing, Mr. Persaud publicly withdrew his support for the APNU+AFC coalition List from which he was extracted and declared his support for the PPP/C List.  

Consequently, in accordance with Article 156.3 (a) and (b) of the Guyana constitution, it is the position of CGID, having consulted with several Attorneys in Guyana and internationally, that Mr. Charrandass Persaud’s vote for the no confidence motion against the government on December 21, is null, void and of no legal effect, and should be vitiated. 

 The institute therefore respectfully solicits your review and sanction of this matter of urgent national importance

Sincerely,

Rickford Burke

President

Caribbean Guyana Institute for Democracy (CGID)  

 

December 24, 2018 

Hon. Dr. Bartland Scotland, M.P.

Speaker of the National Assembly

Republic of Guyana

Parliament Buildings

Brickdam, Georgetown

Guyana

Dear Honorable Speaker:

Article 153 of the Guyana constitution states that: “A member of the National Assembly elected on a list shall cease to be a member of the Assembly if:

(a)  He or she declares in writing to the Speaker or to the Representative of the list from which his or her name was extracted that he or she will not support the list from which his or her name was extracted.”

(b)   He or she declares in writing to the Speaker or to the Representative of the list from which his or her name was extracted, his or her support for another list.

(c)  Prior to the Constitution Amendment Act of 2007, Article 156.3, an original provision of the constitution, stated that:

A Member of the national Assembly elected on a list shall be disqualified from being a member of the Assembly, if he or she in the prescribed manner, declares that he or she will not support the list from which his or her name was extracted or, declares that he or she abstain from supporting that list or, declares his or her support for another list.

This original provision – Article 156.3, was repealed and replaced with the extant provisions of Article 153 by the Constitution Amendment Act of 2007. The amendment, notwithstanding, the fundamental intent of the framers of the constitution remains applicable and paramount to the interpretation of the extant provisions of Article 153.    

The constitution comprises binding rules which govern the organization, powers and administration of government and society. The intent of the framers thereof is the jurisprudential standard for constitutional interpretation.

The framers of the Guyana constitution intended in Article 153 (a) and (b) that a member of the Assembly, elected by the people and extracted from his party’s List, cannot act against, refuse to support nor vote against the List from which he or she was extracted, and neither can a member vote for, with or in support of another List, without first declaring such intent to the Speaker in writing. 

Article 153 (a) and (b) consequently mandates that any member who accordingly makes such declaration against the List from which he or she is extracted or in support of another List, shall cease to be a member of the National Assembly. The commission of an act against the List from which a member was extracted as well as an act in support of another List, for which a written declaration was deliberately and deceitfully withheld from the Speaker, likewise violate the provisions of Article 153 (a) and (b), and similarly disqualifies such a member immediately from the Assembly; since the intention of the constitution is for the member to fully honor the content of Article 153 to the letter.

Evidently, Article 153 mandates that before a member acts against the List from which he or she was extracted, or in support of another List, a declaration of that intent must be first submitted to the Speaker, the consequence of which, or the failure to so declare, require nullification of the act by the Speaker and disqualification of the member from the Assembly.

 Article 153 therefore safeguards against the government side of the Assembly bringing itself down. It follows therefore, that a public withdrawal of support for the List from which a member was extracted and the public declaration of support for another List, with or without a declaration to the Speaker, automatically triggers or invokes Article 153 (a) and (b), and such member shall cease to be a member of the Assembly. 

Honorable, Speaker, on Friday, December, 21, 2018, Mr.Charrandass Persaud, then a member of the Assembly, who was extracted from the APNU+AFC coalition List, voted in favor of the no confidence motion that was tabled in the National Assembly by the parliamentary opposition, against the APNU+AFC coalition government of Guyana, enabling its passage. In so doing, Mr. Persaud publicly withdrew his support for the APNU+AFC coalition List from which he was extracted and declared his support for the PPP/C List.  

Consequently, in accordance with Article 153 (a) and (b) of the Guyana constitution, it is the position of CGID, having consulted with several Attorneys in Guyana and internationally, that Mr. Charrandass Persaud’s vote for the no confidence motion against the government on December 21, is null, void and of no legal effect, and should be vitiated. 

 The institute therefore respectfully solicits your review and sanction of this matter of urgent national importance

Sincerely,

Rickford Burke

President

Caribbean Guyana Institute for Democracy (CGID)  

63 responses to “Charrandass Persaud: Open Letter to Speaker Dr. Bartland Scotland”


  1. Charrandass Persuad displayed the same behavioral trait like David ( BU ) !

    That is …….they are both BLASTED TRAITORS !

    I am not surprised David would promote an article on this topic !

    So sad 😭!!


  2. @Fracured BLP

    Happy Holidays!

    Have you noticed a new party was formed in Guyana?

    A sign of the times eh?

    https://guyaneseonline.net/2018/12/25/guyana-new-political-party-a-new-and-united-guyana-formed/


  3. David

    You should also notice the ineptitude of a ruling coalition, leadership, in allowing a no-confidence motion, in the first place, and how that attempt to remove the government was managed.

    But mismanagement has been characteristic of many governments further afield than Barbados.

    Also, Guyana seems to be sleepwalking into a confrontation with Venezuela.

    Guyana has just given Halliburton the rights to its new oil discoveries. Halliburton are the agents of American militarism, imperialism.

    Some of those oil reserves are located on still disputed territory claimed by Venezuela. Talk about triggers.

    Venezuela for its part, has deepened its relationships with Moscow. These include military but also a near total shift to a Russian led block, emergent. The idiot Trump has also declared an economic war on Venezuela.

    There are also American actions in Colombia, supportive of war. And Brazil has just elected a far-right, fascist leader worse than Trump, if that was thought possible.

    The well-miseducated fools leading Guyana are fecklessly leading this region into what could be a great power hot war.

    Everywhere, donkeys are leading lions!


  4. @Pacha

    How a no confidence motion can be brought is guided by clear rules of parliament. What is the problem then?


  5. David

    No. Not at all. The very rules were not followed. Now there is massive political confusion in Guyana.

    For example, the calculation of the number of votes needed was misunderstood, hence falsely determined. This was done by a Speaker who holds a PhD, in law, we’re told.

    More fundamentally, the leadership of the coalition allowed the vote before canvassing members on their side, seemingly. This is elementary.

    Even more, it seems that Jagdeo’s party, the PPP, is again involved in a level of corruption where this whole fiasco was paid for by his Indo-Guyanese forces. With the single member voting for the no-confidence motion, from the coalition’s government side, absconding soon thereafter.


  6. @Pacha

    Let us take it to a conclusion. The House incumbents were elected officials. Here is a reason why the citizenry must be eternally vigilant.


  7. I think Pacha has it right @12.51p In politics anywhere,the leader exhibiting a natural tendency to be ruthless when the occasion demands would likely remain in control.


  8. @Gabriel

    Unfortunately you maybe correct. The majority of citizens are clueless to be able to appreciate the nuance of every situation, a good leader will demand to be followed cloaked in the niceties a democracy requires.


  9. David

    One of main reasons for the guyana situation is that the ruling coaltion has a junior parner, an indo-guyanese party.

    More importanly, the main partner has seeming jetisoned its main base – about 42 percent of afro-guyanese.

    To the extent where if an election were called they will certainly loose.

    Meanwhile, there are all manner of legalities being argued about.


  10. David

    Carigone maybe out of its depth


  11. It is puzzlingly, embarrassing that Holness who leads a country with a focus to the north leads Caricom. His utterances are empty. It must be.

  12. Vincent Codrington Avatar
    Vincent Codrington

    @ David BU at 2:21 PM

    What is it that you want Mr. Holness to do call out the CARICOM Navy?

  13. Vincent Codrington Avatar
    Vincent Codrington

    “Call out ” = “Mobilize”.


  14. @Vincent

    The criticism is not about Holness and more about an irrelevant Caricom.

  15. Regional Justice Avatar

    With respect, I do not agree with the author. To my mind, section 153 is concerned with the cessation of membership of the National Assembly and not merely or at all with the nullity of a vote against the party from whose list the individual gained membership of the Assembly.The requirement for a formal notice in writing to the Speaker further reinforces this. Moreover, would a single adverse vote suffice for an implied compliance with section 153? Or should this require a consistent course of conduct?

    A teaching moment for Barbados that is also contemplating such legislation. I am surprised that a no-confidence motion against a governing administration requires a simple majority only.

    There is also now in Guyana some debate on what constitutes a “majority”-

    Question 4:
    In determining the result of a vote, what constitutes a majority?

    Answer:
    The word “majority” in this context means, simply, more than half. The use of any other definition, such as 50 percent plus one, is apt to cause problems. Suppose in voting on a motion 17 votes are cast, 9 in favor and 8 opposed. Fifty percent of the votes cast is 8 1/2, so that 50 percent plus one would be 9 1/2. Under such an erroneous definition of a majority, one might say that the motion was not adopted because it did not receive 50 percent plus one of the votes cast, although it was, quite clearly, passed by a majority vote


  16. @ Regional Justice, I cannot agree you. You’re reading the provision incorrectly. To the extent that Article 153 is about “cessation of membership of the National Assembly,” such cessation is a consequence of an action against the list from which that member was extracted, or in favor of another list. If you arguement were true, then the constitution would mandate the member simply to resign.

    If you read the repealed section 156 you would divine the intent of the framers of the constitution. The former Article 156 expressly states that upon a declaration or act against the list from which a member is extracted, and/or upon declaration or support for another list, such member shall be desqulified and cease to be a member. Clearly, in there articles, the constitution forbids acts against the list from which a member was extracted. This prohibition is judicious, because members are not elect directly by a constituency. The electorate elects a list of candidates for Parliament presented to it by a political party. Based on the proportion of the votes that party receives, the Elections Commission allocates that party a number of seats in the national assembly. The Party then extracts the coresponding numbers of names from the list according to the numbers of seats allocated.
    Those extracted names then become the elected MPs for that party. Hence, the seat and vote are not the member’s. They belong to the list. Consequently you cannot act or vote against the list. Can a government sue itself? No! This is a similar principle


  17. CORRECTION:
    @ Regional Justice, I cannot agree you. You’re reading the provision incorrectly. To the extent that Article 153 is about “cessation of membership of the National Assembly,” such cessation is a consequence of an action against the list from which that member was extracted, or in favor of another list. If your arguement were true, then the constitution would mandate the member simply to resign. If you read the repealed section 156, you would divine the intent of the framers of the constitution. The former Article 156 expressly states that upon a declaration or act against the list from which a member is extracted, and/or upon declaration or support for another list, such member shall be desqulified and cease to be a member of the assembly. Clearly, in these articles, the constitution forbids acts against the list from which a member was extracted. This prohibition is judicious, because members are not elect directly by a constituency. The electorate elects a list of candidates for Parliament presented to it by a political party. Based on the proportion of the votes that party receives, the Elections Commission allocates that party a number of seats in the national assembly. The Party then extracts the coresponding number of names from the list according to the number of seats allocated to it.
    Those extracted names then become the elected MPs for that party. Hence, the seat and vote are not the member’s. They belong to the list. Consequently you cannot act or vote against the list. Can a government sue itself? No! This is a similar principle”


  18. I would like to ask one question. Is there a section 153 (a) and (b) in the current Guyana Constitution?


  19. The blogmaster invites readers to note the submission was corrected at at 9.28PM (28 December 2018).


  20. The former Article 156 expressly states that upon a declaration or act against the list from which a member is extracted, and/or upon declaration or support for another list, such member shall be desqulified and cease to be a member.

    Mr Burke, if the Article 156 was repealed and reenacted to what it is now. then, plainly the intention of the framers was to remove the possibility of MPLIED or ORAL cessation of membership and now require it to be put in EXPRESS written form. The two provisions are not identical…


  21. David

    Please invite Jeff to render an opinion


  22. @Pacha

    Jeff reads the blog and comments if inclined to do so.

  23. pieceuhderockyeahright Avatar
    pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ the more informed than de ole man WHUCH MEANS EVERYBODY, I have two questions.

    Please confirm that by the mechanism herein described for election to be a part of the Guyanese system THERE IS NO PROVISION FOR BEBECOMING AN INDEPENDENT AFTER BEING CHOSEN ON A LIST?

    All this being said does this automatically mean that since Persaud may no longer be an MP that “the majority” can still call for a vote again?

    And bein the majority WIN SUCT VOTE?

    Does this invoke a bye election or heneral election in Guyana?


  24. If you read the repealed section 156 you would divine the intent of the framers of the constitution. The former Article 156 expressly states that upon a declaration or act against the list from which a member is extracted, and/or upon declaration or support for another list, such member shall be desqulified and cease to be a member.

    @ Mr Burke -Am I to understand that you are basing your argument on the interpretation of the repealed section. If the meaning of the current provision is the same, why was there a need for repeal and a new enactment with different words?


  25. Will CARICOM stay silent as Russia deploys significant military hardware in Venezuela? This at a time when the USA is weak and unwilling to confront the Russians.

    https://www.caribbeannewsnow.com/2018/12/24/new-elections-to-be-held-in-guyana-as-government-falls-but-that-may-not-be-the-countrys-biggest-problem/


  26. Has my comment gone into the spam bucket?


  27. Yes it did Ping Pong.

    The man said he tired being a yes man!


  28. @Ping Pong December 27, 2018 11:54 AM “Will CARICOM stay silent as Russia deploys significant military hardware in Venezuela? This at a time when the USA is weak and unwilling to confront the Russians.”

    Pray tell me, if as you say the USA is weak, what do you expect CARICOM to do to the Russians?

    You know that Russia’s military is bigger that the entire population of all of CARICOM right? Every last man, woman, child and new born baby.

    Are you suggesting that CARICOM take on the Russians if as you say the USA is too weak to do so?

    Do the Venezuelans care anything about the people of CARICOM?


  29. Does Mr Commissiong, Barbados’ ambassador to CARICOM, support Venezuela and its attack on Guyana’s efforts to develop its petroleum sector? Barbados and the rest of CARICOM has not commented on the deployment by Russia to Venezuela of long range bombers capable of carrying nuclear weapons.


  30. @Fractured BLP December 26, 2018 9:48 AM “… like David ( BU ) ! That is …they are both BLASTED TRAITORS !”

    Not being in love with the DLP does not make one a traitor. I am not in love with the DLP. I have voted for the DLP many times previously, but I did not vote for them on May 24th. I may vote for them in the future, but i don’t know yet. I am still waiting to see how Donville’s case turns out.

    i still love Barbados.

    Just not the DLP, not just now.

    Actually I don’t love the BLP either. Our current arrangement is simply a marriage of convenience.

    Lolll!!!


  31. Ahh Simple Simon
    Our sovereignty and independence may all be just a self deluded charade but we should still make some noise as Venezuela allows the Cold War to be restarted a few hundred kilometres to our south west.


  32. SIMPLE SIMON
    RE Our current arrangement is simply a marriage of convenience.
    IS THAT THE ARRANGEMENT YOU, YOUR SISTERS AND DAUGHTERS USE WHEN YOU AL ENGAGE IN BREEDING ?
    JUST ASKING POLITELY
    IS THAT FIRST OR SECOND?


  33. To: GP. Shoo fly. Don’t bother me.


  34. Going now for the fly swatter.


  35. Why do you make it seem as though child bearing and child rearing are bad things?

    I think that the ability to bear and rear good sons and daughters are blessings from above.

    Wasn’t your Jesus a bastard? Born of an unmarried mother?

    2nd can NEVER be first.

    Second is second class.


  36. A question for the Constitutional experts given the circumstances outlined was prorogation of Parliament a weapon that the Gov’t could have used prior to the vote?


  37. decent young women keep their knees together and get married before they breed
    are you your sisters and breeding daughters married?
    is that second or first?
    2nd can NEVER be first.
    Second is second class.
    breeding out of wedlock is worse than second class


  38. We all get up every morning and thank Almighty God that we are not married to you.

    To be married to you would be a fate worse than hell.


  39. Enough!


  40. And at night before we go to sleep, we thank Almighty God again and again that we are not married to you.

    That would be a fate worse than death.

    2nd is still not 1st.


  41. @Ping Pong
    Yours Dec. 27@ 6.05pm

    We wait with bated breath for a communication from the Caricom Ambassador however he is caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place having supported Maduro and his predecessor Chavez for years. The Barbados Gov’t has always supported its traditional ally Guyana in its dispute with Venezuela so DC will have to engage in a Houdini like stunt to get out of this one.

    BTW those Russian bombers: Cuban missile crisis redux? Never fear Trump likes Putin so all is well (another instance of an overseas based commenter mentioning the name Trump)


  42. In 1992 some Caribbean states in declaring the Caribbean area a zone of peace, objected to the passage through the Caribbean of ships carrying nuclear waste material. The heads of Government issued a statement vowing “to take all necessary steps to protect their people and the fragile ecology of the Caribbean Sea from this highly dangerous threat,”.

    Now Russia plans to bring nuclear weapons to the Caribbean and we are silent.

  43. de pedantic Dribbler Avatar
    de pedantic Dribbler

    Mr Blogmaster, whaloss over here too…this is amazing!

    Amazing because a blogger started a wild claim ( in defamation territory per Dean Jeff discourses but of course the subject of the defamatory claim has absolutely no reputation here on BU to uphold) and has evolved that wildness into a caustic tirade.

    Amazing because we saw how easily social media can be used to incite folks to act to defend themselves when absolutely no defense is required ….

    And @Simple if u now bringing a paternity suit after all these years that suggests you are indeed either suffering a mental challenge or just ingrunt!

    You really need to stop this game as the Blogmaster demanded maybe… U proved ur point that scholarship has nothing a tall to do with decency … But then again we always knew dat….so what was all this palaver about…pls share!


  44. i am as decent as any one else…….and as bajan as all wunnah
    but I just refuse to be a whipping boy for BU scum and slime, and folk who dont know me from Adam, or about my achievements
    there are some here who think it is their job to take me down or put me in my place
    i will always engage because I can easily defeat their logic and lies with the truth!
    I won my stripes……….no one gave me anything
    nor should anyone try to take anything from me


  45. With educated adults behaving like petulant boys and girls we question the state of the things?

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading