No-Confidence Motion: A critical element of democracy – civil society

…says President’s statement on removal “very troubling”, “shocking”

President David Granger’s recent rhetoric on the campaign trail, which hinted at the possible removal of the No-Confidence Motion from the Constitution of Guyana, continues to raise opposition in many quarters.

In an invited comment, Private Sector Commission (PSC) Chairman retired Captain Gerry Gouveia informed this publication that he was shocked when he heard the President’s statement which hinted at intentions to remove the provision.
“The President had always struck me as a man who believed in democracy and who doesn’t change the rules of the game, in the middle of the game, just because it didn’t go in his favour. And so, it was quite surprising to me to hear the President say that.”

“This provision was used against the (former President Donald) Ramotar Government in 2014. And it is a lawful thing. If members of Parliament lose confidence in the Government, they must have a recourse to do it.”
Gouveia not only noted the importance of the No-Confidence Motion to Guyana’s democracy but also respect for the Constitution. He also noted that such a major constitutional change should never be left to politicians but rather, the people, through a referendum.
“The Constitution should be respected until it’s changed. And things like that, you don’t change it easily. I don’t think we should allow any politician or political party to change our Constitution without consultations and a referendum.”

“I believe the No-Confidence Motion is there for a purpose and that we should respect it. I was quite surprised the President made that statement. I did not expect it from him, I’ll tell you that much.”

Very troubling
Meanwhile, noted political activist and lawyer, Christopher Ram, also weighed in on the matter when contacted by this publication. According to Ram, the President’s words heavily imply an intention to remove the No-Confidence Motion.

“That seems to be a logical interpretation and it is therefore very troubling. It would remove one layer of democracy, which would be a very backward step,” Ram said, adding that the President already has history when it comes to constitutional compliance.
Political analyst Ramon Gaskin also made it clear that in no uncertain terms, the no-confidence provision cannot be removed off the statutes. He noted its importance across the developed world.
“All over the world, in democratically-elected Parliaments, you have no-confidence motions. In England, Canada and in the Commonwealth, Germany, Spain and Israel. And generally speaking, it’s when Parliament does not have confidence in the Government, it cannot continue.”
“You can’t remove it. You have to keep it. It is a normal feature of democratic constitutions, this question of confidence. And if the Government does not enjoy the confidence of the Parliament, which is the elected representatives of the people, then you have to get a new coalition or go to the elections to get a new mandate.”
That being said, Gaskin was of the view that there is room for some reforms to the provision. He noted that in some cases, a No-Confidence Motion does not have to lead to an election if the government can come to an agreement with its coalition partners.
“If the No-Confidence Motion was removed, you’d have no way of testing if the government enjoys the confidence of the house. And from time to time, the government and a coalition do lose the confidence of the house, if one of the partners wants to leave. It happens in Israel all the time. If you don’t have that you wouldn’t be able to test it.”
“However, the problem in Guyana is when you lose the no-confidence vote, the Constitution at 106 requires you to go to elections right away, in three months. In the other constitutions, you don’t have that. In some countries, the Constitution gives you a certain amount of time to see if you can put together a new coalition and get back the confidence of the house.”
Gaskin, a former Presidential advisor, explained that in some countries if there is a case whereby the government cannot secure a new coalition that will have the confidence of the parliament, snap elections are then held.
“If you can secure the confidence of the house with this new coalition without going to elections, then you can continue. But if you cannot put together a group to secure the confidence of the house, you have to go to an election. That’s normally the position around the world.”
At the launch of his campaign at D’Urban Park, President Granger informed supporters that “we are going to reform the Constitution so that that nonsense they tried for us in the last twelve months doesn’t happen again.” Since then, the statement has elicited condemnation from various quarters.
When it delivered its rulings on the No-Confidence Motion cases last year, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) had made it clear that former Alliance for Change (AFC) MP, Charrandass Persaud was entitled to vote his conscience and that the NCM was an important part of Guyana’s Parliament.