Unions want end to public spat between president, PM in Trinidad
PORT OF SPAIN, Trinidad (CMC) — The National Trade Union Centre (NATUC) is calling for an end to the public spat between President Anthony Carmona and Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley.
It says the disagreement between the two top State officials cannot and must not be made public knowledge, no matter how compelling the circumstances may be.
Rowley Thursday denied having prior knowledge of a meeting involving President Carmona and his National Security Minister Edmund Dillon earlier this month that dealt with security matters in Trinidad and Tobago.
Rowley, speaking at the end of the weekly Cabinet meeting told reporters that when he was contacted by Dillon about the September 5 meeting, he had instructed his minister to find out precisely what the talks were about.
“And if that is what is being interpreted as licence to conduct a national security meeting and generate a 30-point national security document, then I beg to differ.
“But more importantly that was the only instance in which any reference could be made to approval or non-approval because I know of no prior instance where I would have given any clearance, not once, not twice or three times for a national security meeting involving the chief of defence staff, the commissioner of police and the national security minister,” Rowley told reporters.
On Wednesday, during a 90-minute statement to the media in which he sought to deal with various issues in the public domain regarding his office, President Carmona said he had on three occasions informed Rowley of the meeting.
“On three occasions beforehand I indicated to the honourable prime minister my intention to hold a meeting with the minister of national security and he supported it,” the president said, without elaborating as to how the information had been transmitted to the prime minister.
But in a statement NATUC said that while it respects the president’s right to respond to any assertions of impropriety made against him, the Office of the President of this country should be above political prejudice and should be trustworthy.
“As head of State of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, the president owes it to the citizens to carry out his responsibilities with the highest integrity, transparency and answerability. We expect his conduct and decorum to be exemplary and dignified at all times.”
NATUC said to resort to spiteful name calling and direct attacks on anyone’s character on a public platform, is to “descend into the bacchanal pit of society” and brings the Office of the President into disrepute.
It believes the conference called by Carmona has taken Trinidad and Tobago to a new low and made it the laughing stock of the Caribbean and wider international community.
The umbrella union body is urging the country’s leaders to put country and nationalism above narcissistic emotions, saying this type of behaviour has no place in the running of the affairs of Trinidad and Tobago.
“Each and every one who holds office or positions of authority in Trinidad and Tobago must all times carry the office that they hold with dignity, humility and pride. One’s constitutional responsibilities must take precedence over their personal beliefs,” it added.
Meanwhile, constitutional expert Kenneth Lalla says it appears that Carmona had exceeded his jurisdiction and that there are grounds for the government to move a motion in the Parliament to remove him from office.
“It may appear that some party is exceeding his jurisdiction and the president has no authority over the Government of the country, he consults with the prime minister who is head of Government, in other words the head of State consults with the head of Government and the head of State has no authority to override the powers of the prime minister or to over-reach his powers by going to the Cabinet directly,” Lalla told the Trinidad Express newspaper on Friday.
Lalla said that the controversy between the two top office holders is a case of word against word and the government can take action against the president which is provided for in the Constitution.
Lalla pointed out that Section 35 of the Constitution states that the president may be removed from office under Section 36 where: he wilfully violates any provision of the Constitution; behaves in such a way as to bring his office into hatred, ridicule or contempt; behaves in a way that endangers the security of the State; or because of physical or mental incapacity, he is unable to perform the functions of his office.
He noted further that Section 36 of the Constitution states that the president shall be removed from office where (a) a motion for his removal from office should be investigated by a tribunal is proposed in the House of Representatives.
Lalla, a former chairman of both the police and Public Service Commissions, told the Trinidad Express newspaper that the motion would state the full particulars the grounds on which his removal from office is proposed, and is signed by not less than one-third of the total membership of the House of Representatives.