MPs demand recognition until change of office
Gothataone Moeng | Monday March 31, 2014 16:05
The bill, brought forward by Lobatse Member of Parliament (MP) Nehemiah Modubule looks at changing section 68(1) (a) of the Constitution. It provides for the right of MPs to continue as such up to and including the last day preceding a general election despite the dissolution of Parliament. Currently, MPs are expected to cease their duties, and are no longer recognised as MPs once Parliament is dissolved ahead of the elections. Presenting the bill before Parliament, Modubule said Section 68(1) (a) was discriminatory.
He said that it ended the tenure of MPs upon the dissolution of Parliament, while cabinet members, the Speaker and Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly and councillors remain in office up to the day before elections. He argued that MPs remain custodians of their offices even when Parliament has been dissolved, and that it is thus important that they continue to be recognised as MPs until new members are elected.
He said Section 91(5) of the constitution carries this sentiment as it recognises members of the dissolved Parliament as legitimate members who can be called upon to perform the role of passing legislation.
Section 91(5) states: “If after a dissolution of Parliament and before the holding of the general elections of the elected members of the National Assembly, the president considers that, owing to the existence of a state of war or a state of emergency in Botswana, or any part thereof, it is necessary to recall Parliament, the President may summon the Parliament that has been dissolved to meet and that Parliament shall be deemed to be the Parliament of the time being.”
Sections 43(a) (11) and 59(3) (c) respectively qualify ministers and assistant ministers, speaker and deputy speaker to remain in their position up to the day preceding elections, or until another is appointed in their positions. Modubule argued yesterday that the constitution needed to be amended to correct what he called the discrimination against MPs from other politicians. “Why should it be that only MPs are disadvantaged by the dissolution of the house in preparation for new members?” he asked.
Before the house passed the motion, MPs tussled with the legal ramifications of such an amendment, embarking on a long-winded discussion that needed the assistance of Parliamentary Counsel Thebe Ramokhua. MPs were concerned about whether the clause that Modubule wanted amended is entrenched within the constitution and whether it would need a national referendum before amendment.
MPs also wanted to know whether the amendment of the clause would have any impact on any other clauses in the constitution. Although Ramokhua argued that there was no need for a referendum and that an amendment of the section would not have an impact on other clauses, the Minister of Public Administration and Presidential Affairs Mokgweetsi Masisi disagreed.
He told Parliament that analysis by representatives from the Attorney General’s office, when addressing cabinet, varied with Ramokhua’s interpretation. Masisi’s attempt to have the debate on the bill adjourned was defeated.