THE APPOINTMENT OF THE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

The current method of appointing the Leader of the Opposition is provided by article 184 of the Constitution. It provides that “the Leader of the Opposition shall be elected by and from among non-governmental members of the National Assembly at a meeting held under the chairmanship of the Speaker of the National Assembly, who shall not have the right to vote.” This provision was enacted in 2000 by amending the previously existing provision which provided for the President to appoint as “Minority Leader the elected member who, in his judgment, is best able to command the support of those elected members who do not support the Government.” This provision is the same as in Guyana’s Independence Constitution of 1966 except that the appointment of “Leader of the Opposition” was made by the Governor-General. The amendment of article 184 in 2000 was the result of a recommendation of the Constitution Reform Commission which felt that the appointment of the Leader of the Opposition should not be the business of the President but of the Opposition. The election of the Leader of the Opposition by members of the Opposition took place without controversy within days of the of the convening of the National Assembly after the 2001, 2006, 2011, 2015 and 2020 elections. 

The discussion around this issue in the Constitution Reform Commission revolved around the the role of the President in determining who should be the Leader of the Opposition. The majority of members felt that the President had no business in determining for the Opposition who should be its Leader and that the persons who should do were the Opposition members themselves. It should be noted that the constitutions of Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados and Guyana prior to the amendment in 2000, all provided for the appointment of the Leader of the Opposition by the President or Governor-General of the person who in his or her judgment is best able to command the support of the majority of members who do not support the government. It should be noted that in these countries, including Guyana up to the 2025 elections, no delay or controversy ever took place in relation to the appointment of the Leader of the Opposition. 

Elections in Guyana took place on 1 September 2025. The National Assembly was convened on 3 November 2025. Mr. Mansoor Nadir was elected Speaker and Dr. Vishwa Mahadeo was elected Deputy Speaker. Almost two and a half months have elapsed since then but a meeting of the non-governmental members of the National Assembly has not been convened by the Speaker to elect the Leader of the Opposition as mandated by article 184 of the Constitution. The public knows who the Leader of the Opposition is likely to be and, in any event, it is generally the case, that this issue attracts no controversy as the identity of the person who is likely to become the Leader of the Opposition is well known immediately after the election results are known. Guyana’s election results were known since early September. Speaking about the delay in the appointment of the Leader of the Opposition, the President of Guyana said in response to a question, “I’m sure that the Speaker of the National Assembly would convene the meeting at the appropriate time and have that process completed.”  At the time the Speaker was out of Guyana, but he had since returned and, according to news reports, is now in India. At the time of writing there is no indication as to when the meeting to elect the Leader of the Opposition will take place.

The Constitution Reform Commission recommended the removal of the power of appointment of the Leader of the Opposition from the Executive and handed it not merely to the Legislature but to the Opposition members of the Legislature. Having done so in 2000, now for the first time in Guyana’s history as an independent nation and, long after Guyana moved away from authoritarian rule in 1992, which is more than thirty years ago, and to avoid a situation where it was possible for manipulation of the appointment of the Leader of the Opposition, a delay attracting negative comments from friendly diplomatic representatives has emerged. If it is the Legislature’s responsibility to give effect to article 184 and ensure the completion of the process of appointing the Leader of the Opposition, why is the Executive not speaking out and calling for the process to be activated? By remaining silent, or issuing an expectation which has not materialized, the view has emerged that the Executive is complicit in the delay.   

The absence of the Leader of the Opposition is already being felt in the constitutional governance of Guyana. Consultation with the Leader of the Opposition in relation to Members of the Teaching Service Commission could not take place because there is no Leader of the Opposition. The appointments were made. Is it the intention of the Executive to proceed with other such appointments? Is it the intention of the Executive to present the 2026 Budget without the National Assembly being fully constituted? Or will the Executive delay the Budget presentation until the Speaker decides to proceed with the meeting that normally takes less than five minutes?