20121026, House Debate
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
317 Leave of Absence Friday, October 26, 2012 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, October 26, 2012 The House met at 1.30 p.m. PRAYERS [MR. SPEAKER in the Chair] LEAVE OF ABSENCE Mr. Speaker: Hon, Members, I have received the following communication: Hon. Nizam Baksh, Member of Parliament for Naparima is currently out of the country and has asked to be excused from sittings of the House during the period October 19 to October 28, 2012; and the Member for Tobago West, Hon. Dr. Delmon Baker, has asked to be excused from sittings of the House during the period October 23 to October 30, 2012. The leave which the Members seek is granted. PAPERS LAID 1. Value Added Tax (Amendment to Schedule 2) Order, 2012. [The Minister of Housing, Land and Marine Affairs (Hon. Dr. Roodal Moonilal)] 2. Trinidad and Tobago International Financial Centre Management Company Limited—Annual Audited Financial Statements for the period ended September 30, 2010. [Hon. Dr. Roodal Moonilal] To be referred to the Public Accounts (Enterprises) Committee. 3. Administrative Report of the Siparia Regional Corporation for the period October, 2010 to September, 2011. [The Minister of Local Government (Hon. Dr. Surujrattan Rambachan)] COMMITTEE OF PRIVILEGES (DR. KEITH ROWLEY) The Minister of Sport (Hon. Anil Roberts): Mr. Speaker, in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order 27, I seek your leave to raise the following matter as a question of privilege: “On 18th September 2012, the Member of Parliament for Diego Martin West and the Honourable Leader of the Opposition met with His Excellency the Acting President of the Republic, to present a petition to His Excellency, calling for an investigation into the proclamation of Section 34 of the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Act. His Excellency, the Acting President, on 28th September 2012, issued a press release concerning the matter raised with him by the Member for Diego 318 Committee of Privileges Friday, October 26, 2012 [HON. A. ROBERTS] Martin West. He also dispatched a confidential letter to the Member, detailing the results of his investigations into the matter raised by the Member for Diego Martin West. The Member for Diego Martin West, upon receipt of the confidential letter from His Excellency, wrote to the Acting President, seeking leave to make public the contents of the confidential letter. In this letter the Member purported to deliver an ultimatum to the Acting President, indicating that should he (the Member for Diego Martin West) not receive a reply from the Acting President within two days, he would make public the contents of the letter, without regard to His Excellency’s imposition of confidentiality. At a public meeting held on Thursday, 18th October 2012 in the car park of the Starlite Shopping Plaza, Diego Martin, the Member of Parliament for Diego Martin West proceeded to discharge his ultimatum by selectively quoting extracts from the letter he had received from the Acting President. The Member for Diego Martin West then proceeded to launch an unwarranted and scurrilous attack on the Office of the President by imputing that the Acting President was attempting to: ‘rubber stamp’ what he referred to as ‘the Prime Minister’s attempt to sweep this matter under the carpet.’ Further, the Member for Diego Martin West called into question the legitimacy of the constitutional arrangements for the selection of an Acting President as contained in Section 27 of the Constitution, when he said: ‘It calls into question immediately, is it acceptable in Trinidad and Tobago that an arrangement is such, that a politician from inside the Parliament who is an active politician in the COP.(Congress of the People) could end up in the Office of the President where the rule of law is being undermined by the Cabinet?’ Mr. Speaker, the privilege of freedom of speech carries with it the need to exercise responsibility and such responsibility does not start and end with a sitting of the House of Representatives or with the Standing Orders. The utterances of the Member for Diego Martin West were carried in a live radio broadcast and widely reported in the media. 319 Committee of Privileges Friday, October 26, 2012 Mr. Speaker, Section 39 of the Constitution states as follows: ‘There shall be a Parliament of Trinidad and Tobago which shall consist of the President, the Senate and the House of Representatives.’ Section 27(1) states as follows: ‘27 (1) Where the Office of President is vacant or the is incapable of performing his functions as President by reason of his absence from Trinidad and Tobago or by reason of illness, the President of the Senate shall act temporarily as President.’ And section 38(1) states as follows: ‘38(1) Subject to Section 36, the President shall not be answerable to any court for the performance of the functions of his office or for any act done by him in the performance of those functions.’ Notwithstanding these provisions in the Constitution, and without regard to constitutional conventions which attend these provisions, the Member for Diego Martin West by his reckless utterances committed contempt when he: (a) Scandalized and brought into odium, ridicule and public distrust the Office of the President of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, by imputing improper motives to the holder of that Office; (b) Impugned the integrity of the President of the Senate in the legitimate exercise of his constitutionally mandated function as Acting President, by ascribing to him, improper motives; (c) Reflected adversely on the conduct of the holder of the high office of President of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. Mr. Speaker, His Excellency the President or Acting President, as Head of the Parliament, must be protected from reflections upon his character or conduct by Members of Parliament; as such reflections constitute a direct attack not only on His Excellency but on the very institution of Parliament. Such reflections can degrade the Parliament in the public’s estimation. Mr. Speaker, the Standing Orders of the House of Representatives provide at Standing Orders 36(9) and (10) as follows: ‘(9) The conduct of Her Majesty and Members of the Royal family shall not be called into question. 320 Committee of Privileges Friday, October 26, 2012 [HON. A. ROBERTS] (10) The conduct of the Governor, Members of the Senate or the House of Representatives, or of judges or other persons engaged in the administration of justice shall not be raised except upon a substantive motion moved for the purpose; and in any amendment, question to a Minister, or debate on a motion dealing with any other subject, any reference to the conduct of any such person as aforesaid shall be out of order.’ Indeed, Mr. Speaker, while these Standing Orders apply to the conduct of Members of the House during proceedings, it is well established that outside of the House, in matters pertaining to his functions as a Member, every Member of the House should be guided ‘mutatis mutandis’ by principles enunciated in the Standing Orders governing his conduct during proceedings of the House of Representatives. Mr. Speaker, I submit that a consequence of the foregoing is that by his utterances, the Member for Diego Martin West has committed contempt when he: (1) Scandalized and brought into odium, ridicule and public distrust, the Office of President, by imputing improper motives to the Acting President (2) Reflected adversely on the conduct of the Acting President (3) Impugned the integrity and conduct of the President of the Senate in the legitimate exercise of his functions as Acting President and (4) As a further consequence of the foregoing the Honourable Leader of the Opposition has, by his conduct undermined the dignity of the House of Representatives. Mr. Speaker, I beg to move that this matter be referred to the Committee of Privileges of the House of Representatives for consideration and report.” [Desk thumping] Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members, the matter raised before me requires careful consideration of whether a prima facie case of breach of privilege has been made out. I will announce my ruling on this matter at a subsequent sitting of the House. 321 AG (Breach of Parliamentary Trust) Friday, October 26, 2012 1.45 p.m. ATTORNEY GENERAL (BREACH OF PARLIAMENTARY TRUST) Dr. Keith Rowley (Diego Martin West): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I beg to move the following Motion standing in my name: Whereas section 76(2) of the Constitution specifies—and I quote—“that the Attorney General shall, subject to section 79, be responsible for the administration of legal affairs in Trinidad and Tobago and legal proceedings for and against the State”; And whereas the Attorney General participated in the presentation to Parliament of the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings) Bill, 2011, which contained a clause that created an amnesty for certain legal proceedings (referred to as section 34); And whereas the Attorney General had knowledge of and supported the Government’s solemn undertaking to Parliament that no part of the Bill would be brought into force until such time as all supporting rules, administrative and physical infrastructure were in place and stakeholders consulted; And whereas in the absence of the discharge of the said undertakings, the Attorney General had knowledge of and/or involvement in the unexpected proclamation of section 34, thereby prematurely bringing into force an amnesty with consequences for certain legal proceedings involving certain persons; And whereas earlier, the Attorney General