THA sitting ends in uproar over motion

Thursday’s sitting of the Tobago House of Assembly (THA) ended in chaos after a motion moved by Minority Leader and interim leader of the Democratic Action Congress (DAC) Hochoy Charles, was evicted by Presiding Officer, Ann Mitchell-Gift. Charles’ motion was ruled out of order (not properly before the House) by the Presiding Officer after a submission to that effect by Leader of  Executive Council Business, Hilton Sandy. Sandy’s submission came after Charles, in a lengthy contribution, had piloted the motion which was seconded by DAC Assemblyman, Ashworth Jack. The submission was made when the House reconvened after the tea-break. Sandy contended that Charles’ motion — which urged the House to call on government “to pursue, as a matter of utmost urgency, constitution reform to accord to the people of Tobago, Democratic Internal Self-Government in 2005, inter-alia” —was similar to a motion moved by NAR Assemblywoman Miriam Caesar-Moore, and unanimously approved by the House on January 24, 2002.

He submitted this was contrary to THA Standing Order 40 (3). The Standing Order 40 (3) states: “It shall be out of order to attempt to revive in any debate a matter or reconsider any specific question upon which the Assembly has come to a conclusion during the current session (2001-2005), except upon a substantive motion for rescission, which motion, shall not be brought sooner than six months after the date on which the Assembly reached its decision.” The approved 2002 motion reads: “Whereas the constitution of Trinidad and Tobago enacted on March 29, 1976 is the supreme law of the land; and whereas the constitution seeks to ensure democracy by protecting the rights, freedom and privileges of the citizens and maintains the stability of our nation; and whereas there are fundamental issues that are affecting the citizens and the relationship between the islands of Trinidad and Tobago that are not addressed by the constitution in its present form; be it resolved that this House call on the government of Trinidad and Tobago to undertake the important and necessary task of constitution reform in Trinidad and Tobago; and be it further resolved that the constitution reform exercise should specially address the relationship between Trinidad and Tobago.” (The latter clause was inserted through an amendment by the majority membership).

The Presiding Officer upheld Sandy’s motion, ruling that Charles’ motion was really a “play on words” but was more or less the same as the 2002 Caesar-Moore motion. Charles, however, did not agree, and stressed that there was a procedure for filing motions and for it to be placed on the Order Paper, arguing that his motion had been approved and indeed placed on the Order Paper. “My ruling is that it is an update of the previous (2002) motion,” the Presiding Officer responded. Charles, visibly outraged, shouted across the floor: “Kangaroo court! This is worse than the law of the jungle; a Kangaroo court.” Caesar-Moore also loudly declared: “Undemocratic; this is not democracy!”

However, proceedings then went into a “tailspin” when, after the motion had already been thrown out, a motion was moved by Sandy to discontinue the debate and this motion was defeated as the majority was only seven, where nine was required. The five minority members had voted “nay.” The Presiding Officer then enquired whether any member wished to say anything in the debate on the motion which she had already thrown out. Confusion reigned in the House, until Charles rose and “advised” Sandy that all he had to do was to move the motion for the adjournment of the House. Sandy did as he was told.