Collective responsibility and ministerial responsibility – Part one

Dear Editor,
In recent proceedings in the National Assembly on a “no confidence motion” against the Minister of Home Affairs, Mr Clement Rohee, much emphasis was placed on the concept of ministerial responsibility as that concept is applied in Britain.
According to Professor H W Wade in his text on ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, page 29, “ministerial responsibility is one aspect of the supremacy of parliament under which ministers are responsible to it both individually and collectively through the cabinet.”
It is important to note immediately, that Britain does not have a written constitution as Guyana does. In Britain, it is the supremacy of Parliament that is recognised. The courts in Britain cannot strike down an Act of Parliament as the courts of Guyana can. In this country our Constitution is the supreme law and it is the supremacy of the constitution that is recognised. In the constitutional framework of Guyana, there is no provision for individual ministerial responsibility to Parliament. The Constitution makes provision for cabinet’s collective responsibility to Parliament.
Article 106(2) of the Constitution provides:
“The Cabinet shall aid and advise the President in the general direction and control of the Government of Guyana and shall be collectively responsible therefore to Parliament.”
In India, the concept of “collective responsibility” of the Cabinet to Parliament is, like Guyana, also provided for by the Indian Constitution. It is said that this collective responsibility is joint and indivisible. There is no provision in the Constitution of India, laying down the individual responsibility of a minister and his accountability to Parliament for all the acts of omission and commission in his departmental charge.
The “no confidence motion” against Minister Rohee, stemmed from an allegation of police excesses at Linden recently. Note is to be taken of section 7 (1) the Police Act which provides:
“7 (1): The Commissioner shall, subject to the general orders and directions of the Minister, have the command and superintendence of the Force, and shall be responsible to the Minister for peace and good order throughout Guyana …………….”
It could not reasonably be argued the minister has responsibility for the day to day management, superintendence and command of the police force. It is evident that such directions as the minister can give to the commissioner would be administrative in nature and would relate to the command and superintendence of the force. The minister does not give the commissioner operational instructions, directions relating to effective policing and law enforcement.
Yours truly,
Hydar Ally