By CLINT CHAN TACK Saturday, November 7 2009

click on pic to zoom in

SPEAKER TO SPEAKER: Deputy Speaker of the House Pennelope Beckles (left) speaks to House Speaker Barry Sinanan during sitting of the House of Represen...

DEPUTY SPEAKER Pennelope Beckles yesterday ruled that while Independent Senator Dana Seetahal was guilty of “glaring disrespect” to Speaker Barry Sinanan, her offence was not serious enough to warrant sending her to the Privileges Committee of the House of Representatives.

At an October 30 sitting of the House, Information Minister Neil Parsanlal asked that Seetahal be referred to the Privileges Committee for statements she wrote in a newspaper column which appeared to be disrespectful of Sinanan. The Speaker directed that Beckles, as his deputy, rule on the matter since it directly involved him.

Beckles told the assembled MPs yesterday that her main task was to determine whether the words used in Seetahal’s column did in fact constitute a contempt of the House. She explained that contempt as defined by Erskine May’s Parliamentary Practice includes “actions or conduct which, though not breaches of any specific privilege, obstruct or impede this House in the performance of its functions or have the tendency to produce such a result.”

Applying this definition to Seetahal’s column, Beckles ruled: “I find no prima facie case of contempt in the matter before me to warrant any further action by this House.” However, Seetahal did not escape unscathed, as Beckles added: “ What I have found however, is that the actions by this senator were pre-emptive and unwarranted and demonstrated discourtesy to the Chair and to this House.”

Explaining the pivotal role which a Speaker plays in a parliamentary democracy, Beckles said Seetahal’s interpretation of Sinanan’s actions during the debate on the Validation and Immunity from Proceedings Bill, earlier this month in the House, was “more than a bit presumptuous.” While it was not uncommon for a Speaker’s rulings to be criticised, Beckles said as the second most senior senator on the Independent bench, Seetahal “ought to know better” that the Speaker’s actions could be questioned through a substantive motion raised under Standing Order 36(10).

Stating that Seetahal could not classify herself as a journalist, Beckles said the senator compounded her disrespect to Sinanan and the House by calling a press conference in the Parliament to “reassert the rightfulness of her actions” before she (Beckles) made her ruling.

Noting that similar actions in other Commonwealth jurisdictions have resulted in parliamentarians being punished for breach of privilege, Beckles said: “I would think it similarly brazen for any member of this Honourable House to presume that he or she could boldly question the rightfulness of a ruling by the Chair of the Senate in a manner that is plainly disrespectful of that office.”

Stressing that there must be “good relations and civility” between the members of House and Senate, Beckles urged the assembled MPs “to be more mindful of their actions both inside and outside of the House, since they are reflective on this institution which we must always hold in the highest regard.”