voting repeatedly

Cook Islands 1983: The year of voting repeatedly

Just 20 weeks after the March 30 1983 general elections in the Cook Islands, the Cook Islands Parliament was dissolved on Au gust 17, and new general elec tions ordered for November 2.

The strange sequence of events left the Cook Islands Par liament without any member able to command the support of a majority and thus win appoint ment as prime minister.

No sign of the potential dead lock existed in the early days of the Cook Islands Party (CIP) government under the prime ministership of Geoffrey Henry, who held a narrow but workable majority of 13-10 over the De mocratic Party (DP). The DP had lost a seat after the general elec tion in an election petition, but even if the DP were to regain it, the CIP Government was be lieved still to have an effective majority.

The events originated in a machinery provision of the Cook Islands constitution which re quires the person holding office as prime minister at the opening of a new parliament to resign as prime minister before the end of the seventh day of the session.

This provision, included in the constitution since 1965, was par ticularly designed to provide for a non-party system where there may be a number of independent members of parliament. It had been given scant regard since 1965, successive prime ministers merely going through the mo tions of resigning and being reap pointed the same day.

But Geoffrey Henry took the view immediately after his ap pointment as prime minister that this provision was no longer operative, that with the evolving Cook Islands constitution the provision could be regarded as void. Advice to this effect was tendered to the Queen’s Repre sentative, Sir Gaven Donne, by the prime minister, backed by an opinion from a New Zealand lawyer. However, conflicting ad vice was tendered by government legal officers.

To resolve the matter the Queen’s Representative in stituted proceedings in the High Court of the Cook Islands for a declaratory order. The High Court moved the matter into the Court of Appeal.

The case aroused little interest in the Cook Islands at the time of its hearing, June 30, as it ap peared to be a pure technicality.

The Court of Appeal reserved its decision.

But two events then occurred which transformed the ruling of the court into one of great politic al consequence.

The first was the sudden death of CIP Member of Parliament for Titikaveka, Matapo Matapo, on July 25. This trimmed Geoffrey Henry’s CIP majority to 12-10.

Now two by-elections were outstanding.

The second event was the de cision of CIP Cabinet member Tupui Henry to withdraw his support for the appointment of Geoffrey Henry as prime minister.

The DP had always en couraged dissension in the CIP camp over the leadership issue, and had publicly supported Tupui Henry over Geoffrey Hen ry. That support was now reach ing new proportions: Tupui Hen ry announced in the Cook Islands News he had been “made an offer” by the DP.

The withdrawal of Tupui Hen ry’s support meant that Geoffrey Henry no longer had a majority in Parliament. He commanded only 11 seats. Tupui Henry, with the support of the DP, also com manded 11. Two by-elections were due to be held, and there was speculation that Tupui Hen ry had the tacit support of other

Cip Mps.

The Court of Appeal’s deci sion on July 29, upheld the letter of the constitution and confirmed that Geoffrey Henry was re quired to resign by the end of the seventh day of the session, Au gust 2.

Immediately Tupui Henry and the DP confirmed their position

as supporting a coalition govern ment with Tupui Henry as prime minister.

Geoffrey Henry resigned on August 2, his Cabinet being dis solved with his resignation. The Queen’s Representative, as ex ecutive authority, took over the reins of government.

Speculation was rife for sever al days, as Tupui Henry an nounced that three other CIP Members of Parliament would join him in a coalition govern ment. Geoffrey Henry announed that none would join Tupui Hen ry: the ranks of the CIP were closed.

While the contest for numbers continued a new dimension was emerging: the role of the Queen’s Representative.

In the first instance that role was merely to determine the numbers: to ascertain whether any one MP commanded the sup port of the majority of the mem bers. To do this Sir Gaven ar ranged for a series of votes to be taken among the members over a number of days, the voting for each prospective leader (Geof frey Henry CIP, Vincent Ingram DP, and Tupui Henry coalition) being taken on separate days.

As at August 10, the position was Geoffrey Henry 11, Tupui Henry 11.

Sir Gaven’s role at this point became something more than merely determining the numbers.

In a matter of two days, on August 12, a by-election was to be held which would end the numbers game one leader would have a majority, and a government could be appointed.

But Sir Gaven saw the situation as demanding recognition of other factors.

The DP was favored to win the Atiu seat. Its candidate had held it since before self-government in 1965. A DP victory would mean that the DP would come back to power with the one CIP member (Tupui Henry) in the coalition government.

As opposed to this, Sir Gaven Donne was faced with the clear

victory the CIP had had in the March 30 general election. The CIP had held the other seat (Titikaveka) which was to have a by-election in November. If that by-election were to be held be fore the Atiu one, and the CIP were to retain the seat, then the CIP would have been able to remain in government under Geoffrey Henry as prime minister.

A DP victory in the Atiu by election could have meant the Tupui Henry-DP Government being in power for up to a year, for even if the CIP retained the Titikaveka seat a budget could have been passed by the parlia ment then in session before the Titikaveka by-election, and par liament not called together until the need to pass another.

The dissolution of parliament before the Atiu by-election seemed the likely course. In this way the voters would again have their say. But the prospect of an early general election was not one to be welcomed.

Sir Gaven sought a possible compromise by inviting the lead ers to await the outcome of both the Atiu and Titikaveka by elections before the step of ap pointment of a government or dissolution would be taken.

Tupui Henry and Vincent In gram (as Leader of the Oppos tion), believing there were good prospects that the DP would win both seats, agreed to this. The DP had previously held the Titikaveka seat and lost it in the March 30 general election to the CIP candidate, who held a strong personal following in his village.

His death would increase the chances of the DP candidate.

Geoffrey Henry, apparently for similar reasons, declined Sir Ga ven’s invitation.

The decision was thus taken on August 17, to dissolve parlia ment. Geoffrey Henry was ap pointed caretaker prime minister, with restricted powers in policy areas, until a general election on November 2. Trevor Clarke in Rarotonga.