Africa-Press – Mauritius. In our adapted model of Westminster parliament, the post of Leader of the Opposition is a constitutional one, as an alternate eventual Prime Minister. The Constitution provides for his consultation on various issues including key appointments and matters that are of national interest.
It stands to reason that the LO and his responsibilities need respect both from the Speaker and the government benches, but is that applied to any extent? Lex delves into the issues.
* It’s the Private Notice Questions addressed to the Prime Minister that usually thrust the Leader of the Opposition (LO) into the limelight, but not much is known by the public about the role and responsibilities of the LO.
How important is this post in the Westminsterian parliamentary system of democracy? The post of Leader of Opposition is an emanation of the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy.
The public hardly pays heed to that post in Mauritius though it is a constitutional one. It is an important post in that it allows the decisionsof government in diverse fields to be scrutinized and criticized if need be. Leading the opposition is an extraordinarily difficult job in a system where the rules of parliamentary democracy are played fairly.
It is an even more if not an impossible task in the face of an overbearing Speaker intent on shielding the Executive from the legitimate scrutiny of an opposition whose task is to level criticism against the policies or query malfeasance in the administration of Government and, even, to outline alternative policies.
We have seen what has been happening heresince the 2019 elections:the attitude of the Speaker is justified by the majority on the ground that the Opposition bullies the Speaker! Really? One may ask where the bullying emanates from.
*The framers of our Constitution decided that the LO should be a constitutional post. What could have been the reasoning behind that decision?
Precisely to drive home to both the majority party and the Opposition as well as the general public that no parliament and no political party in a democracy should be allowed to function without checks and balances.
By making the post a constitutional one, the aim was to confer an aura of respectability on the post and ensure that the government of the day should be on the lookout for any impropriety that would be pinpointed by the Opposition and the LO.
*The respect that framers of our Constitution held for this post contrasts singularly with what obtains in Singapore.
Neither Singapore’s Constitution nor the Standing Orders of its Parliament provide for such a position; the LO was previously considered as an unofficial role, and there had been no formally designated LO in Singapore’s legislature until 2020. What does this say about the type of democratic regime that the politicians of that time wanted for Mauritius?
For More News And Analysis About Mauritius Follow Africa-Press
