Former Speaker of the House of Representatives Lawrence A. Joseph

Tuesday, July 21st, 2009: St George’s, Grenada: At the request of a particular media house, just prior to my departure from Grenada for the United Kingdom on 29th May last, I was obliged to make a statement concerning a specific abuse of parliamentary privilege.

It was alleged that a member of Parliament was observed to be using a cell phone in parliament during one of its sitting and that the Speaker allowed that blatant parliamentary breach to go on unheeded.

Just as soon as I arrived back in Grenada after successfully completing a Summer Course at the University of London in Legislative Drafting, I am again compelled to make a statement on the parliamentary fiasco which took place at a sitting of the House on 14th July last.

During that sitting, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Hon. George McGuire, unceremoniously ejected the Leader of the Opposition Dr. the Right Hon. Keith Mitchell, from the sitting of that House.

The reason that the Speaker gave for taking action against the Opposition Leader was that he was in breach of the rules of the House, when, whilst making a presentation during a debate, he responded directly to certain government ministers (when they asked certain questions of him) rather than directing his response through the Speaker.   It is to be noted that the Opposition Leader was later invited by the Speaker to “make a statement” about the incident, to which he declined, keeping well within his rights.

I have observed with keen interest the way in which a certain trade unionist and a prominent city lawyer have highlighted subsequent statements made by the Opposition Leader in an attempt to cloud the real issue at hand.  These attempts must be viewed for what they are worth, as the Speaker never made reference to those comments during his deliberations.  Whether those comments compromised the real issue at hand is a separate matter which may considered.

In accordance with the Standing Orders of the House, the only occasion that a Speaker may unilaterally instruct a member to withdraw from a sitting of the House, is if in accordance with Standing Order No. 43(2) that member’s “conduct is grossly disorderly”.  A member, however, may be suspended from the House, if the House adopts a motion to do so, after that member has been named in accordance with Standing Order No. 43 (3).

It must be accepted that the Leader of the Opposition was in breach of Standing Order No. 35(1) when he spoke across the floor, instead of through the Speaker.  So too were the ministers of government who addressed certain questions directly to him rather than through the Speaker.  It is my understanding that those Ministers were the Hon. Sylvester Quarless and the Hon. Glynis Roberts.

The question therefore arises as to whether the conduct of the Opposition Leader which has been identified as “speaking across the floor” can be considered to be contrary to Standing Order No. 43(3) and therefore “grossly disorderly”?  If the Opposition Leader’s conduct cannot be classified as “grossly disorderly”, then the Speaker acted irrationally, by asking him to withdraw from the rest of the sitting of the House.

It is my humble opinion that if a member has been ruled to be in breach of that particular rule, especially on just one occasion during a sitting, the member’s conduct ought not to be considered grossly disorderly, but that the member’s conduct may be classified as a minor breach of the rules of the House.

According to Erskine May’s “Parliamentary Practice 23rd Edition, which is considered to be “the Authority” on parliamentary practice in Commonwealth countries “to prevent any member being taken unawares it is usual for the Speaker (or the Chairman) repeatedly to warn any member who may be transgressing the rules of debate or otherwise conducting himself in a disorderly manner before ordering him to withdraw from the House or naming him”

The mere fact of asking a member to “make a statement” is not a warning.

It seems clear therefore that in the present circumstance, the Speaker acted highhandedly by instructing the Opposition Leader to withdraw from the House.  His decision was unnecessary and inappropriate.

This type of practice, if allowed to continue definitely poses a serious threat to the democratic process.

LAWRENCE A. JOSEPH

Former Speaker of the House of Representatives

EDITORS NOTE:

Where was Hon. Nazim Burke, Chester Humphrey, George Brizan, Anslem Clouden and others when this took place?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiWE3iC3TdQ

Readers I urge you to listen to what transpired in Parliament and you would hear for yourselves that Dr. Mitchell was interrupted (not through the speaker) by Hon. Glenis Roberts and Hon. Sylvester Quarless.  Something which the Speaker of the house chose not to hear. You will find the Audio that the media interestingly left out in their reporting within the following link Dr. the Rt. Hon Keith Mitchell presentation in Parliament July 14th, 2009

With all said and done, take a look and listen carefully to Prime Minister's response regarding the ejection of Opposition leader Dr. the Rt. Hon Keith Mitchell from Parliament. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdmvejIKuMc