A motion that Opposition Leader Mark Golding attempted to move in Parliament on Tuesday concerning the Integrity Commssion’s (IC) investigative report into the financial affairs of Prime Minister Andrew Holness was ruled “out of order” by Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives Heroy Clarke.

Clarke said he would not entertain the motion as it breached Section 22 of the standing orders of the House, and after several unsucessful attempts by Golding to lay the motion and heated exchanges across the aisle, the Opposition members walked out.

Prior to this, shortly before the parliamentary proceedings came to a close, Golding announced that he had a motion and he was allowed to proceed.

“There is a ministerial code of conduct in place from 2002 that governs the conduct of members of the Cabinet, and whereas the prime minister did not inform the people of Jamaica that he was investigated by the Integrity [Commission]…” Golding began, but he was stopped in his tracks by Clarke, and on a point of order by Government Minister Pearnel Charles Jr.

“If it is that the member intends to travel down a road that is going to breach the Standing Orders in raising matters that are sub judice, I’m just telling you that cannot be accommodated in this House. So if that is the intention, stop now!” Charles Jr said.

“When I read from the Erskine May Parliamentary practice, paragraph 2 page 333, says a matter now under judicial consideration ought not to be discussed as it is sub judice. At this time, I am now ruling that this motion will not be entertained,” he said, which caused an uproar from the Opposition.

Golding attempted to explain what his motion entailed, but he was not allowed to continue.

“Mr Speaker, you’ve indicated this matter is sub judice; I’m not aware of that. However, what this motion engages is simply a matter of a breach of ministerial code of conduct by the prime minister,” he said before Clarke again stopped him.

At this juncture, there was an exchange of words between Opposition and Government members. The Opposition then walked out.

At this point Speaker of the House Juliet Holness returned to the Chamber and Member of Parliament for St Catherine South Western, Everald Warmington, asked if there was a signed private members motion before the House

She responded to say that a private members motion came during the sitting of the House and was signed during the sitting of the House by the member making the motion.

“But convention is any such motion must be sent to the clerk of the House two days before, and this is what we have been doing all the while, and the gentleman across there was supposed to be the leader of that side always mention every day [about] convention and he wants to breach that today? You can’t send resolution, nothing at all during the sitting of the House. The clerk ought to receive that two days ago. So it can’t be entertained…As a matter of fact, we shouldn’t discuss it. It must be ignored,” he said.

Holness said that as speaker she has repeated on many occasions that things need to get to the Parliament with adequate time so they can be read and proper procedures are followed.

“We were, in fact, notified by e-mail that a motion would come, but it didn’t come until just before I got to Parliament, and it does take some time to ensure that motions are properly laid. A signed copy of the motion came to me at the desk when member [Phillip] Paulwell came to the desk during the sitting of the Parliament. And I just came out for a moment a while ago and I noted the Opposition walking out. I was coming back to tell them I’d gone out because I was just completing my review so that they could go ahead and debate if they so choose. However, even though they heard as much, they continued to walk out,” she said.

Continuing the discussion, Charles Jr said it was “so unfortunate that the Opposition has chosen to walk out on this issue”.

“The Opposition is led by an attorney at law who is fully aware that there is no ambiguity in the rule of sub judice. It is [because the] rule is essential in preventing interference in legal proceedings and preventing the risk of undermining the fairness of any trial or any matter that is before the court being adjudicated. But what will happen is that they will use it as a tool to attempt to cause persons looking on to think that there is an effort to block the motion. And that is what is unfortunate, the continuous effort to manipulate the minds of Jamaican people. And what I find disgusting is the discussions around integrity by persons who are willing to break down the integrity of this core proceeding for their own pursuit of power,” he said.

“All they want is headlines. But I’m gonna tell you, we’re not going to allow the integrity of this House and the rules of which we abide to be inflicted, conflicted, or destroyed by their pursuit of headlines and power, it won’t happen,” he said.

Justice Minister Delroy Chuck said he believed the motion was not appropriate, given the time it came, which he opined was done on purpose.