Senate President Mark Wade early Thursday morning cast the deciding vote as the Trinidad and Tobago government was able to pass the controversial Special Operations Bill which the government introduced to replace the failed Zones of Special Operations (ZOSOs).
Attorney General John Jeremie, as he had done when the bill was first debated in the House of Representatives last week, said the constitutionality of the legislation is based on the balance that it strikes between the enhanced security powers granted to the services and the protection of fundamental rights and the rule of law.
But following a lengthy debate in the Senate, the 15 government legislators and the 15 opposition and independent senators, maintained their original position forcing Mark, to break the tie and cast his vote in favour of the government.
‘Honourable Senators, the question is that, in fact, the report of the division, 15 members voted for the bill, 15 members voted against the bill. I have stated my reason and I think I shall say it again. There is no settled practise in this Parliament based on my research on this issue of the status quo.
‘I have done the research on this matter.I will make it available at the appropriate time to my colleagues who have requested it. I vote with the ayes. The vote has been settled.16 in favour, 15 against. The vote has been taken. The bill has been passed,’ Mark said becoming embroiled in a confrontation with opposition egislators who sought to use the Standing Orders to raise questions regarding his vote.
But Mark would have none of it, telling the Clerk of the Senate to proceed with reading the bill for a third time in order to be accepted as legislation by the Senate.
‘Clerk, clerk, proceed, please. Clerk, proceed, please. There can be no debate when it comes to,’ he said, as former attorney general Faris Al Rawi insisted that he was not debating the matter, but raiising questions based on the Standing Orders.
‘ A Standing Order has been raised, Mr. President. Mr. President, I stand on Standing Order 154-2… You should respond to the Standing Order,’ Al Rawi said with Mark, who has served as the presiding officer in both houses of Parliament in recent years, asking the opposition member to sit down.
‘I’m asking you to take a seat once. I’m saying it twice. I’m saying it a third time.Let the Clerk proceed and let the Clerk proceed in accordance with our rules. Clerk, proceed, please,’ Mark said, reminding the Senate that he had already warned former attorney general that ‘he cannot stand on any point of order at this time of the proceeding.
‘There is no debate on this matter. If he continues to defy the chair, I have warned him once, I have warned him twice, and this is the third time. If you continue, I’ll ask you to take your leave. Take your leave. There is no standing order. You are defying the chair. Take your seat.Take your seat. Take your seat’
Jeremie had told legislators that the legislation does not grant powers equivalent to a state of emergency (SoE) and that Kamla Persad-Bissessar the government accepts that the new legislation ‘might interfere with the right of the individual to liberty and to the enjoyment of property’ under the Constitution, as well as the right of the individual to respect his private and family life and the freedom of movement.
‘Our view is that any such infringement is reasonable and proportionate,’ he added.
The government in January failed to get parliamentary approval for the ZOSOs which had faced criticism over human rights concerns and safeguards surrounding the proposed powers. Under the previous bill, the Prime Minister would have been able to designate communities as Zones of Special Operations, with joint police and Defence Force operations permitted within those areas.
The new bill provides for the establishment of policing districts, the conduct of special operations to combat criminality in those policing districts including also for persons to be in possession of permits to enter or leave those districts
During the Senate proceedings on Thursday, Independent legislator, Senior Counsel Anthony D. Vieira failed to secure support for an amendment preventing the Prime Minister from vetoing an appointment made by the POlicce Commissioner in deciding who should head a police operation.
He told legislators it is is difficult to explain why the political executive should possess a veto over the Police Commissioner’s choice as to which officer should lead any operation into the districts.
‘There’s a contradiction. We say policing is to be led by the Commissioner, but then we tell the Commissioner that he cannot choose his operational commander if the Prime Minister objects. So I have a difficulty in acting an ordinary statutory provision which permits the political executive to veto the Commissioner’s choice of the senior police officer who will command those operations,’ he said.
‘I don’t understand what is the mischief which requires this veto,’ he said, tabling a clause that would ‘preserve the Commissioner’s professional responsibility for operational police appointments and to avoid unnecessary political involvement in operational command.’
But Jeremie contended that the Trinidad and Tobago Constitution provides that the Commissioner of Police shall act in accordance with the Police Service Act and the regulations made there under.
‘Now, if he is required to act in accordance with regulations of the police I see no reason why by legislation he cannot act in a matter such as this. I agree with you that he takes the lead, but where I disagree with you is that this is a democracy and as the democratic head of the executive, we’re not taking on the President here.
‘I do not see why…I struggle to find a reason why the Prime Minister cannot exercise a veto. She’s not choosing, the Commissioner of Police has chosen, but essentially she’s exercising her veto,’ Jeremie said.
Al Rawi sought to remind legislators that the London-based Privy Council, the country’s highest and final court, had in earlier ruling said ‘that you ought not to have the political involvement.
‘If the legislation, the Police Service Act and the constitution read together, contemplate that the President may make regulations. Regulations are subsidiary regulations, that’s subsidiary law. And if he is to act in accordance with subsidiary law, then I see no reason why, by primary legislation, you cannot say to him that he must have some sort of, as you’re asking, that he consult with the Prime Minister.