By Binta Jaiteh
The Speaker of the National Assembly, Fabakary Tombong Jatta, on Wednesday ruled that the request by the Attorney General and Minister of Justice to withdraw the Vetting Bill was procedurally in order.
The ruling followed a point of order raised by the Member for Lower Saloum, Sainey Jawara, who questioned the legality of the Minister’s decision to withdraw the bill after it had been referred to a committee.
Delivering his ruling, the Speaker said the matter required interpretation of Order 76(1) of the Standing Orders, particularly whether a bill that has been referred to a committee may lawfully be withdrawn at that stage.
He cites Order 76(1), which provides that the person in charge of a bill may, with notice, move a motion for its withdrawal at any stage before it has been read the third time, except when the bill is before a committee.
Jatta stated that there was no dispute that the Attorney General was the person in charge of the bill, noting that it had not been read for the third time. He also confirmed that notice of withdrawal was duly given.
The Speaker says the National Assembly derives its authority from the Constitution and remains master of its own proceedings, subject only to the Constitution. He noted that committees exercise delegated authority and do not supersede the plenary authority of the Assembly.
According to him, interpreting Order 76(1) to permanently remove the Assembly’s power to withdraw a bill once referred to a committee would elevate committee procedure above plenary authority and restrict the Assembly’s constitutional control over its legislative agenda.
He added that such an interpretation would be inconsistent with constitutional principles, as the Assembly retained ultimate control over every stage of a bill until it was passed or rejected.
Jatta further explains that the prohibition in the Standing Orders is intended to prevent disruption of active committee proceedings without proper notice or procedural order, and should not be interpreted to mean that a sponsoring authority loses the ability to seek withdrawal until committee deliberations are concluded.
He warned that a contrary interpretation would compel committees to expend time and public resources on bills the government no longer intended to pursue, describing such an outcome as legislative inefficiency.
The Speaker subsequently ruled that the Attorney General’s request to withdraw the Vetting Bill was procedurally in order.
