ABSTRACT
On 10 November 2014, President Donald Ramotar suspended the Guyanese parliament, thereby avoiding a no-confidence motion brought by the opposition that was due to be debated that day. As Ramotar himself conceded, the one-seat majority of the opposition ‘could only mean [the passage of the vote of no confidence] and the immediate irreversible dissolution of parliament’ prompting fresh elections to be called within ninety days.1 While Ramotar insisted on the constitutionality of prorogation (provided for under Article 70 (1) of the Guyana Constitution), the suspension of parliament was viewed by the opposition at home and influential voices abroad as a clear violation of democracy, resulting in the partial suspension of aid by the European Union and condemnation from officials in the United States. Opposition statements denouncing the move as a breach of fundamental democratic rights were echoed in the official response by the former colonial power: Andrew Ayre, British High Commissioner to Guyana, condemned the suspension of parliament as a ‘clear breach of the Guyana Constitution and the Commonwealth Charter’ and called for a return to parliamentary democracy without delay.2 Under increasing pressure, Ramotar finally announced that elections would be held in May 2015. The result of these elections was an historic victory for the opposition coalition, bringing to an end 23 years of rule by the governing party.
