The 2015 General and Regional Elections were held about a year and a half earlier than constitutional due. The reasons for that should be revisited and in doing so it would present a particular context of the current political situation facing the country. Donald Ramotar was President at that time, having come to office in 2011 with a minority government; the first and only Executive President thus far to be in that unenviable position.
The Opposition, comprising A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) and the Alliance For Change (AFC), had a combined majority of 33 seats and the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) Government, 32. Being at the disadvantage of the Opposition combined one-seat majority, it was virtually impossible for Ramotar to implement any major policy or programme that needed parliamentary approval.
As a matter of fact, the then Opposition used its one-seat advantage to slash budgetary allocations to a meagre dollar for some agencies, including the Government Information Agency (GINA) and the National Communications Network (NCN), both of which were accused of spreading Government propaganda with taxpayers ’money.
Funding was also deprived for transformative projects, such as the Amaila Falls Hydro, the Specialty Hospital and the Cheddi Jagan International Airport (CJIA) expansion. Other critical physical and social infrastructural development programmes met the same fate. Workers and their family suffered and development was curtailed as the Opposition exploited their combined one-seat advantage at the expense of the welfare of the people and country.
From all analyses, the reasons the Opposition offered for its actions were generally not valid. Many believed that the APNU/AFC Opposition did not want Guyana’s rapid and unprecedented development to continue while it held the parliamentary majority. One thought was had the funding being approved, the PPP Government would have benefited politically and, in simple terms, looked good despite being a minority. In other words, suffer the people and country for political gratification.
Not stopping at denying funds, the then Opposition also made strong demands. Citing what it believed to be unacceptable financial transactions through sole-sourcing, it clamoured for the Public Procurement Commission (PPC) so as to bring an end to it. It accused the PPP Government of preferential treatment of contractors with regard to the supply of necessary materials. In addition, it demanded Local Government Elections (LGE) despite the belief that the desired framework had not been derived.
Those two particular demands were used as the Sword of Damocles over Ramotar’s head for him to either give in or face a no-confidence motion in Parliament. Knowing fully well that they could have toppled his government, given their combined one-seat majority, the Opposition pressed their demands and filed the no-confidence motion as an ultimatum. Ramotar prorogued Parliament, as allowed by the Constitution, and eventually was forced to set an election date – May 11, 2015.
Interestingly, it wasn’t the only ultimatum he got. A leading lawyer and executive of the AFC gave his own in demanding the government resign within a given timeframe. In the end, APNU and the AFC formed a coalition and was declared the winner of the elections with 33 seats; a government majority of one. That was used to pass budgets, parliamentary Acts and other motions it favoured.
On December 21, 2018, it suffered a humiliating defeat in a no-confidence motion brought by the Opposition PPP/C. The motion was carried as a Government Member of Parliament voted with the PPP/C. That once again showed the impact and advantage of one parliamentary seat. Now, on the losing end, the Government ran to the courts seeking protection on the grounds that the one- seat majority, which it exploited up to December 21 of last year, is now suddenly not valid.
A plethora of excuses, including absurd Mathematics, are used to support its case despite the unambiguity of the Constitution on a no-confidence motion and its ensuing process. Maybe it is not a coincidence that the author of the straw-clutching Mathematics theory is the same Attorney who gave Ramotar an ultimatum just prior to the 2015 elections.
That aside, if Ramotar had not prorogued Parliament and the then APNU/AFC Opposition had brought the no-confidence motion as threatened, it would have been carried given its one-seat majority. What if the PPP/C then had refused to abide by the Constitution and used absurd Mathematics as an excuse? What if the PPP/C had accepted the results of the no-confidence motion, but, subsequently changed its position? What if the PPP/C had rushed to the court to buy time? What if the PPP/C, some 40 days after the motion was carried, acted as if the no-confidence vote never happened? What if the PPP/C had refused to call the election and tried to influence GECOM in support?
Given the country’s political history, almost certainly, the PPP/C would not have been allowed to disregard a successful no-confidence vote or the constitutional requirements it mandates. If history were to provide guidance, any refusal by the PPP/C in such circumstances would not have gone down well. The answers to the questions would more than likely unveil that missing context of the Government’s argument today. If the question of, had it been the other way around, were to be posed, it appears that the context is conveniently absent.
