The two houses of Parliament-the House of Representatives and the Senate-are expected to be summoned in historic session to vote on whether a tribunal should be appointed, to investigate President George Maxwell Richards’s conduct with respect to the appointment of an Integrity Commission.

This is the next constitutional step following yesterday’s raising of a matter of privilege against Richards by the Opposition. Parliament resumed from its six-week break with a bang as this matter was heard.

According to the Constitution, two-thirds of the members of both houses (48 MPs) must agree to the appointment of this tribunal. If the joint assembly fails to get this requisite majority, the matter would fall. The Opposition has a total of 21 votes in both Houses and therefore need an additional 27 MPs to support their motion. In short, they would have to get Government support.

The first step in the process, however, was taken yesterday when one-third of the members of the House of Representatives (as required by the Opposition) that is 14 Opposition signed a document, calling for the tribunal to be set up, with the view to removing Richards.

In presenting its case, Opposition Chief Whip Dr Hamza Rafeeq pointed to instances in which the President, in the eyes of the Opposition, brought his office into disrepute.

Rafeeq raised three occasions.

The first was an alleged breach of promise by the President to retired Appeal Court judge Zainool Hosein.

Hosein resigned hours after his appointment to the Integrity Commission, claiming that the President had promised him the vice chairmanship of the commission. He also found out that Jeffrey McFarlane was appointed to that position, only when McFarlane read the oath.

Rafeeq also cited the appointment of McFarlane as vice chairman in breach of the provisions of the Integrity in Public Life Act, which stated clearly that a person in public life was disqualified from sitting on the commission.

McFarlane was an executive member of the National Insurance Board (NIB) and sat on the board of NIPDEC and Home Mortgage Bank at the time of his appointment. He was forced to return the instrument of appointment after receiving advice that his appointment was unconstitutional.

Thirdly, Rafeeq highlighted the appointment of chairman of the Integrity Commission, Fr Henry Charles, who resigned following revelations that he had plagiarised the work of international writers. Charles said he had told this to the President before his appointment.

Charles, however, said he resigned because his appointment conflicted with the Canon law of the Church.

The entire commission collapsed shortly after with the resignations of former Industrila Court judge Gladys Gafoor and UWI bursar Lylla Bada.

’The President has wilfully violated the Constitution and the law of the land, and behaved in such a way as to bring his office into hatred, ridicule and contempt within the meaning of section 35 A and B of the Constitution. Be it resolved that a tribunal be appointed in accordance with section 36 of the Constitution to investigate the removal of the President from office,’ Rafeeq said.

Sinanan said he will have to study the Constitution and will report to the House in due course.

Rafeeq also raised a second matter of privilege against the Government - its failure to ensure that the Opposition has its private members day every month.

Rafeeq noted the standing orders of the House, which state that the Opposition would have its day on the fourth Friday of every month.

However, he lamented that for three consecutive months they were denied this privilege and his expressions of concerns made to Leader of Government Business, Colm Imbert, were ignored.

Sinanan said this was a very important issue raised by the Opposition and added that it is just that they have their day.

Sinanan therefore said he was referring the matter to the Privileges Committee, saying that it was important that a report be delivered on this issue.