Charrandass Persaud: Open Letter to Speaker Dr. Bartland Scotland
Submitted by Rickford Burke, President, Caribbean Guyana Institute for Democracy (CGID)
corrected submission
December 24, 2018
Hon. Dr. Bartland Scotland, M.P.
Speaker of the National Assembly
Republic of Guyana
Parliament Buildings
Brickdam, Georgetown
Guyana
Dear Honorable Speaker:
Article 156.3 of the Guyana constitution states that: “A member of the National Assembly elected on a list shall cease to be a member of the Assembly if:
(a) “He or she declares in writing to the Speaker or to the Representative of the list from which his or her name was extracted that he or she will not support the list from which his or her name was extracted.”
(b) “He or she declares in writing to the Speaker or to the Representative of the list from which his or her name was extracted, his or her support for another list.”
Prior to the Constitution Amendment Act of 2007, Article 156.3, an original provision of the constitution, stated that “A Member of the national Assembly elected on a list shall be disqualified from being a member of the Assembly, if he or she in the prescribed manner, declares that he or she will not support the list from which his or her name was extracted or, declares that he or she abstain from supporting that list or, declares his or her support for another list.” This original provision – Article 156.3, was repealed and replaced with the extant provisions of Article 153 by the Constitution Amendment Act of 2007. The amendment, notwithstanding, the fundamental intent of the framers of the constitution remains applicable and paramount to the interpretation of the extant provisions of Article 153.
The constitution comprises binding rules which govern the organization, powers and administration of government and society. The intent of the framers thereof is the jurisprudential standard for constitutional interpretation.
The framers of the Guyana constitution intended in Article 153 (a) and (b) that a member of the Assembly, elected by the people and extracted from his party’s List, cannot act against, refuse to support nor vote against the List from which he or she was extracted, and neither can a member vote for, with or in support of another List, without first declaring such intent to the Speaker in writing.
Article 156.3 (a) and (b) consequently mandates that any member who accordingly makes such declaration against the List from which he or she is extracted or in support of another List, shall cease to be a member of the National Assembly. The commission of an act against the List from which a member was extracted as well as an act in support of another List, for which a written declaration was deliberately and deceitfully withheld from the Speaker, likewise violate the provisions of Article 156.3 (a) and (b), and similarly disqualifies such a member immediately from the Assembly; since the intention of the constitution is for the member to fully honor the content of Article 156.3 to the letter.
Evidently, Article 156.3 mandates that before a member acts against the List from which he or she was extracted, or in support of another List, a declaration of that intent must be first submitted to the Speaker, the consequence of which, or the failure to so declare, require nullification of the act by the Speaker and disqualification of the member from the Assembly.
Article 156.3 therefore safeguards against the government side of the Assembly bringing itself down. It follows therefore, that a public withdrawal of support for the List from which a member was extracted and the public declaration of support for another List, with or without a declaration to the Speaker, automatically triggers or invokes Article 156.3 (a) and (b), and such member shall cease to be a member of the Assembly.
Honorable, Speaker, on Friday, December, 21, 2018, Mr.Charrandass Persaud, then a member of the Assembly, who was extracted from the APNU+AFC coalition List, voted in favor of the no confidence motion that was tabled in the National Assembly by the parliamentary opposition, against the APNU+AFC coalition government of Guyana, enabling its passage. In so doing, Mr. Persaud publicly withdrew his support for the APNU+AFC coalition List from which he was extracted and declared his support for the PPP/C List.
Consequently, in accordance with Article 156.3 (a) and (b) of the Guyana constitution, it is the position of CGID, having consulted with several Attorneys in Guyana and internationally, that Mr. Charrandass Persaud’s vote for the no confidence motion against the government on December 21, is null, void and of no legal effect, and should be vitiated.
The institute therefore respectfully solicits your review and sanction of this matter of urgent national importance
Sincerely,
Rickford Burke
President
Caribbean Guyana Institute for Democracy (CGID)
December 24, 2018
Hon. Dr. Bartland Scotland, M.P.
Speaker of the National Assembly
Republic of Guyana
Parliament Buildings
Brickdam, Georgetown
Guyana
Dear Honorable Speaker:
Article 153 of the Guyana constitution states that: “A member of the National Assembly elected on a list shall cease to be a member of the Assembly if:
(a) He or she declares in writing to the Speaker or to the Representative of the list from which his or her name was extracted that he or she will not support the list from which his or her name was extracted.”
(b) He or she declares in writing to the Speaker or to the Representative of the list from which his or her name was extracted, his or her support for another list.
(c) Prior to the Constitution Amendment Act of 2007, Article 156.3, an original provision of the constitution, stated that:
A Member of the national Assembly elected on a list shall be disqualified from being a member of the Assembly, if he or she in the prescribed manner, declares that he or she will not support the list from which his or her name was extracted or, declares that he or she abstain from supporting that list or, declares his or her support for another list.
This original provision – Article 156.3, was repealed and replaced with the extant provisions of Article 153 by the Constitution Amendment Act of 2007. The amendment, notwithstanding, the fundamental intent of the framers of the constitution remains applicable and paramount to the interpretation of the extant provisions of Article 153.
The constitution comprises binding rules which govern the organization, powers and administration of government and society. The intent of the framers thereof is the jurisprudential standard for constitutional interpretation.
The framers of the Guyana constitution intended in Article 153 (a) and (b) that a member of the Assembly, elected by the people and extracted from his party’s List, cannot act against, refuse to support nor vote against the List from which he or she was extracted, and neither can a member vote for, with or in support of another List, without first declaring such intent to the Speaker in writing.
Article 153 (a) and (b) consequently mandates that any member who accordingly makes such declaration against the List from which he or she is extracted or in support of another List, shall cease to be a member of the National Assembly. The commission of an act against the List from which a member was extracted as well as an act in support of another List, for which a written declaration was deliberately and deceitfully withheld from the Speaker, likewise violate the provisions of Article 153 (a) and (b), and similarly disqualifies such a member immediately from the Assembly; since the intention of the constitution is for the member to fully honor the content of Article 153 to the letter.
Evidently, Article 153 mandates that before a member acts against the List from which he or she was extracted, or in support of another List, a declaration of that intent must be first submitted to the Speaker, the consequence of which, or the failure to so declare, require nullification of the act by the Speaker and disqualification of the member from the Assembly.
Article 153 therefore safeguards against the government side of the Assembly bringing itself down. It follows therefore, that a public withdrawal of support for the List from which a member was extracted and the public declaration of support for another List, with or without a declaration to the Speaker, automatically triggers or invokes Article 153 (a) and (b), and such member shall cease to be a member of the Assembly.
Honorable, Speaker, on Friday, December, 21, 2018, Mr.Charrandass Persaud, then a member of the Assembly, who was extracted from the APNU+AFC coalition List, voted in favor of the no confidence motion that was tabled in the National Assembly by the parliamentary opposition, against the APNU+AFC coalition government of Guyana, enabling its passage. In so doing, Mr. Persaud publicly withdrew his support for the APNU+AFC coalition List from which he was extracted and declared his support for the PPP/C List.
Consequently, in accordance with Article 153 (a) and (b) of the Guyana constitution, it is the position of CGID, having consulted with several Attorneys in Guyana and internationally, that Mr. Charrandass Persaud’s vote for the no confidence motion against the government on December 21, is null, void and of no legal effect, and should be vitiated.
The institute therefore respectfully solicits your review and sanction of this matter of urgent national importance
Sincerely,
Rickford Burke
President
Caribbean Guyana Institute for Democracy (CGID)
Charrandass Persuad displayed the same behavioral trait like David ( BU ) !
That is …….they are both BLASTED TRAITORS !
I am not surprised David would promote an article on this topic !
So sad 😭!!
LikeLike
@Fracured BLP
Happy Holidays!
Have you noticed a new party was formed in Guyana?
A sign of the times eh?
https://guyaneseonline.net/2018/12/25/guyana-new-political-party-a-new-and-united-guyana-formed/
LikeLike
David
You should also notice the ineptitude of a ruling coalition, leadership, in allowing a no-confidence motion, in the first place, and how that attempt to remove the government was managed.
But mismanagement has been characteristic of many governments further afield than Barbados.
Also, Guyana seems to be sleepwalking into a confrontation with Venezuela.
Guyana has just given Halliburton the rights to its new oil discoveries. Halliburton are the agents of American militarism, imperialism.
Some of those oil reserves are located on still disputed territory claimed by Venezuela. Talk about triggers.
Venezuela for its part, has deepened its relationships with Moscow. These include military but also a near total shift to a Russian led block, emergent. The idiot Trump has also declared an economic war on Venezuela.
There are also American actions in Colombia, supportive of war. And Brazil has just elected a far-right, fascist leader worse than Trump, if that was thought possible.
The well-miseducated fools leading Guyana are fecklessly leading this region into what could be a great power hot war.
Everywhere, donkeys are leading lions!
LikeLike
@Pacha
How a no confidence motion can be brought is guided by clear rules of parliament. What is the problem then?
LikeLike
David
No. Not at all. The very rules were not followed. Now there is massive political confusion in Guyana.
For example, the calculation of the number of votes needed was misunderstood, hence falsely determined. This was done by a Speaker who holds a PhD, in law, we’re told.
More fundamentally, the leadership of the coalition allowed the vote before canvassing members on their side, seemingly. This is elementary.
Even more, it seems that Jagdeo’s party, the PPP, is again involved in a level of corruption where this whole fiasco was paid for by his Indo-Guyanese forces. With the single member voting for the no-confidence motion, from the coalition’s government side, absconding soon thereafter.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Pacha
Let us take it to a conclusion. The House incumbents were elected officials. Here is a reason why the citizenry must be eternally vigilant.
LikeLike
I think Pacha has it right @12.51p In politics anywhere,the leader exhibiting a natural tendency to be ruthless when the occasion demands would likely remain in control.
LikeLike
@Gabriel
Unfortunately you maybe correct. The majority of citizens are clueless to be able to appreciate the nuance of every situation, a good leader will demand to be followed cloaked in the niceties a democracy requires.
LikeLike
Caricom to the rescue.
https://www.stlucianewsonline.com/caricom-reiterates-support-for-the-sovereignty-of-guyana-after-venezuelan-navy-incursion/
LikeLike
David
One of main reasons for the guyana situation is that the ruling coaltion has a junior parner, an indo-guyanese party.
More importanly, the main partner has seeming jetisoned its main base – about 42 percent of afro-guyanese.
To the extent where if an election were called they will certainly loose.
Meanwhile, there are all manner of legalities being argued about.
LikeLiked by 1 person
David
Carigone maybe out of its depth
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is puzzlingly, embarrassing that Holness who leads a country with a focus to the north leads Caricom. His utterances are empty. It must be.
LikeLike
@ David BU at 2:21 PM
What is it that you want Mr. Holness to do call out the CARICOM Navy?
LikeLike
“Call out ” = “Mobilize”.
LikeLike
@Vincent
The criticism is not about Holness and more about an irrelevant Caricom.
LikeLike
With respect, I do not agree with the author. To my mind, section 153 is concerned with the cessation of membership of the National Assembly and not merely or at all with the nullity of a vote against the party from whose list the individual gained membership of the Assembly.The requirement for a formal notice in writing to the Speaker further reinforces this. Moreover, would a single adverse vote suffice for an implied compliance with section 153? Or should this require a consistent course of conduct?
A teaching moment for Barbados that is also contemplating such legislation. I am surprised that a no-confidence motion against a governing administration requires a simple majority only.
There is also now in Guyana some debate on what constitutes a “majority”-
Question 4:
In determining the result of a vote, what constitutes a majority?
Answer:
The word “majority” in this context means, simply, more than half. The use of any other definition, such as 50 percent plus one, is apt to cause problems. Suppose in voting on a motion 17 votes are cast, 9 in favor and 8 opposed. Fifty percent of the votes cast is 8 1/2, so that 50 percent plus one would be 9 1/2. Under such an erroneous definition of a majority, one might say that the motion was not adopted because it did not receive 50 percent plus one of the votes cast, although it was, quite clearly, passed by a majority vote
LikeLike
@ Regional Justice, I cannot agree you. You’re reading the provision incorrectly. To the extent that Article 153 is about “cessation of membership of the National Assembly,” such cessation is a consequence of an action against the list from which that member was extracted, or in favor of another list. If you arguement were true, then the constitution would mandate the member simply to resign.
If you read the repealed section 156 you would divine the intent of the framers of the constitution. The former Article 156 expressly states that upon a declaration or act against the list from which a member is extracted, and/or upon declaration or support for another list, such member shall be desqulified and cease to be a member. Clearly, in there articles, the constitution forbids acts against the list from which a member was extracted. This prohibition is judicious, because members are not elect directly by a constituency. The electorate elects a list of candidates for Parliament presented to it by a political party. Based on the proportion of the votes that party receives, the Elections Commission allocates that party a number of seats in the national assembly. The Party then extracts the coresponding numbers of names from the list according to the numbers of seats allocated.
Those extracted names then become the elected MPs for that party. Hence, the seat and vote are not the member’s. They belong to the list. Consequently you cannot act or vote against the list. Can a government sue itself? No! This is a similar principle
LikeLiked by 1 person
CORRECTION:
@ Regional Justice, I cannot agree you. You’re reading the provision incorrectly. To the extent that Article 153 is about “cessation of membership of the National Assembly,” such cessation is a consequence of an action against the list from which that member was extracted, or in favor of another list. If your arguement were true, then the constitution would mandate the member simply to resign. If you read the repealed section 156, you would divine the intent of the framers of the constitution. The former Article 156 expressly states that upon a declaration or act against the list from which a member is extracted, and/or upon declaration or support for another list, such member shall be desqulified and cease to be a member of the assembly. Clearly, in these articles, the constitution forbids acts against the list from which a member was extracted. This prohibition is judicious, because members are not elect directly by a constituency. The electorate elects a list of candidates for Parliament presented to it by a political party. Based on the proportion of the votes that party receives, the Elections Commission allocates that party a number of seats in the national assembly. The Party then extracts the coresponding number of names from the list according to the number of seats allocated to it.
Those extracted names then become the elected MPs for that party. Hence, the seat and vote are not the member’s. They belong to the list. Consequently you cannot act or vote against the list. Can a government sue itself? No! This is a similar principle”
LikeLike
I would like to ask one question. Is there a section 153 (a) and (b) in the current Guyana Constitution?
LikeLike
The blogmaster invites readers to note the submission was corrected at at 9.28PM (28 December 2018).
LikeLiked by 1 person
The former Article 156 expressly states that upon a declaration or act against the list from which a member is extracted, and/or upon declaration or support for another list, such member shall be desqulified and cease to be a member.
Mr Burke, if the Article 156 was repealed and reenacted to what it is now. then, plainly the intention of the framers was to remove the possibility of MPLIED or ORAL cessation of membership and now require it to be put in EXPRESS written form. The two provisions are not identical…
LikeLiked by 1 person
David
Please invite Jeff to render an opinion
LikeLike
@Pacha
Jeff reads the blog and comments if inclined to do so.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ the more informed than de ole man WHUCH MEANS EVERYBODY, I have two questions.
Please confirm that by the mechanism herein described for election to be a part of the Guyanese system THERE IS NO PROVISION FOR BEBECOMING AN INDEPENDENT AFTER BEING CHOSEN ON A LIST?
All this being said does this automatically mean that since Persaud may no longer be an MP that “the majority” can still call for a vote again?
And bein the majority WIN SUCT VOTE?
Does this invoke a bye election or heneral election in Guyana?
LikeLiked by 1 person
If you read the repealed section 156 you would divine the intent of the framers of the constitution. The former Article 156 expressly states that upon a declaration or act against the list from which a member is extracted, and/or upon declaration or support for another list, such member shall be desqulified and cease to be a member.
@ Mr Burke -Am I to understand that you are basing your argument on the interpretation of the repealed section. If the meaning of the current provision is the same, why was there a need for repeal and a new enactment with different words?
LikeLike
Will CARICOM stay silent as Russia deploys significant military hardware in Venezuela? This at a time when the USA is weak and unwilling to confront the Russians.
https://www.caribbeannewsnow.com/2018/12/24/new-elections-to-be-held-in-guyana-as-government-falls-but-that-may-not-be-the-countrys-biggest-problem/
LikeLike
Has my comment gone into the spam bucket?
LikeLike
https://www.caribbeannewsnow.com/2018/12/24/new-elections-to-be-held-in-guyana-as-government-falls-but-that-may-not-be-the-countrys-biggest-problem/
LikeLike
Yes it did Ping Pong.
The man said he tired being a yes man!
LikeLike
LikeLike
@Ping Pong December 27, 2018 11:54 AM “Will CARICOM stay silent as Russia deploys significant military hardware in Venezuela? This at a time when the USA is weak and unwilling to confront the Russians.”
Pray tell me, if as you say the USA is weak, what do you expect CARICOM to do to the Russians?
You know that Russia’s military is bigger that the entire population of all of CARICOM right? Every last man, woman, child and new born baby.
Are you suggesting that CARICOM take on the Russians if as you say the USA is too weak to do so?
Do the Venezuelans care anything about the people of CARICOM?
LikeLike
Does Mr Commissiong, Barbados’ ambassador to CARICOM, support Venezuela and its attack on Guyana’s efforts to develop its petroleum sector? Barbados and the rest of CARICOM has not commented on the deployment by Russia to Venezuela of long range bombers capable of carrying nuclear weapons.
LikeLike
@Fractured BLP December 26, 2018 9:48 AM “… like David ( BU ) ! That is …they are both BLASTED TRAITORS !”
Not being in love with the DLP does not make one a traitor. I am not in love with the DLP. I have voted for the DLP many times previously, but I did not vote for them on May 24th. I may vote for them in the future, but i don’t know yet. I am still waiting to see how Donville’s case turns out.
i still love Barbados.
Just not the DLP, not just now.
Actually I don’t love the BLP either. Our current arrangement is simply a marriage of convenience.
Lolll!!!
LikeLike
Ahh Simple Simon
Our sovereignty and independence may all be just a self deluded charade but we should still make some noise as Venezuela allows the Cold War to be restarted a few hundred kilometres to our south west.
LikeLike
SIMPLE SIMON
RE Our current arrangement is simply a marriage of convenience.
IS THAT THE ARRANGEMENT YOU, YOUR SISTERS AND DAUGHTERS USE WHEN YOU AL ENGAGE IN BREEDING ?
JUST ASKING POLITELY
IS THAT FIRST OR SECOND?
LikeLike
Russia to set up nuclear bombers on Caribbean island
https://americanmilitarynews.com/2018/12/russian-newspaper-russia-to-set-up-nuclear-bombers-on-caribbean-island/
LikeLike
To: GP. Shoo fly. Don’t bother me.
LikeLike
Going now for the fly swatter.
LikeLike
Why do you make it seem as though child bearing and child rearing are bad things?
I think that the ability to bear and rear good sons and daughters are blessings from above.
Wasn’t your Jesus a bastard? Born of an unmarried mother?
2nd can NEVER be first.
Second is second class.
LikeLike
A question for the Constitutional experts given the circumstances outlined was prorogation of Parliament a weapon that the Gov’t could have used prior to the vote?
LikeLike
decent young women keep their knees together and get married before they breed
are you your sisters and breeding daughters married?
is that second or first?
2nd can NEVER be first.
Second is second class.
breeding out of wedlock is worse than second class
LikeLike
We all get up every morning and thank Almighty God that we are not married to you.
To be married to you would be a fate worse than hell.
LikeLike
Enough!
LikeLiked by 1 person
And at night before we go to sleep, we thank Almighty God again and again that we are not married to you.
That would be a fate worse than death.
2nd is still not 1st.
LikeLike
@Ping Pong
Yours Dec. 27@ 6.05pm
We wait with bated breath for a communication from the Caricom Ambassador however he is caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place having supported Maduro and his predecessor Chavez for years. The Barbados Gov’t has always supported its traditional ally Guyana in its dispute with Venezuela so DC will have to engage in a Houdini like stunt to get out of this one.
BTW those Russian bombers: Cuban missile crisis redux? Never fear Trump likes Putin so all is well (another instance of an overseas based commenter mentioning the name Trump)
LikeLike
In 1992 some Caribbean states in declaring the Caribbean area a zone of peace, objected to the passage through the Caribbean of ships carrying nuclear waste material. The heads of Government issued a statement vowing “to take all necessary steps to protect their people and the fragile ecology of the Caribbean Sea from this highly dangerous threat,”.
Now Russia plans to bring nuclear weapons to the Caribbean and we are silent.
LikeLike
Mr Blogmaster, whaloss over here too…this is amazing!
Amazing because a blogger started a wild claim ( in defamation territory per Dean Jeff discourses but of course the subject of the defamatory claim has absolutely no reputation here on BU to uphold) and has evolved that wildness into a caustic tirade.
Amazing because we saw how easily social media can be used to incite folks to act to defend themselves when absolutely no defense is required ….
And @Simple if u now bringing a paternity suit after all these years that suggests you are indeed either suffering a mental challenge or just ingrunt!
You really need to stop this game as the Blogmaster demanded maybe… U proved ur point that scholarship has nothing a tall to do with decency … But then again we always knew dat….so what was all this palaver about…pls share!
LikeLike
i am as decent as any one else…….and as bajan as all wunnah
but I just refuse to be a whipping boy for BU scum and slime, and folk who dont know me from Adam, or about my achievements
there are some here who think it is their job to take me down or put me in my place
i will always engage because I can easily defeat their logic and lies with the truth!
I won my stripes……….no one gave me anything
nor should anyone try to take anything from me
LikeLike
With educated adults behaving like petulant boys and girls we question the state of the things?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Caribbean as a Zone of Peace Under Threat | Barbados Underground
RE With educated adults behaving like petulant boys and girls we question the state of the things?
the state of the things IN BARBADOS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH petulant boys and girls IT HAS TO DO WITH VERY POOR INFERIOR SUPERIORS AND LEADERS
IN ADDITION THERE ARE A LOT OF MORONS AROUND AS SUPPORTING ACTORS
LikeLike
@ David
What petulant, boys what?
Seupsss…
Low class misfit and ‘nothinarian’ – who managed to pass some shiite exam almost 50 YEARS ago…
and who seems to expect some kind of ongoing hero worship as a result.
Can you imagine such a spoilt, egotistical, childish misfit making any meaningful contribution anywhere…?
Sounds just like the megalomaniacal idiot Trump that he worships…
Best thing the Ministry of Health of Barbados EVER did…
..was to dump his donkey in Miami …. to watch cricket and eat fishcakes – until the ‘rupture’…
THANK YOU Liz…
LOL
ha ha ha
LikeLike
@ Ping Pong
De ole man shall attempt to respond to your remark and wise observation
DAVID COME SING A SONG is a puppet of the Mugabe regime
Mugabe Mottley is now begging the United States of America and its various agencies for working capital to run the government of Barbados while she claims de economy has rebounded WITH IMF LOANS.
Do you think that pooch sucker David going be ALLOWED TO OPEN HE MOUTH and speak about the sovereign rights of his Venezuelan friends AND EMBARRASS MUGABE?
Worse yet, scuttle her prolific begging missions?
Whu it might even surface that one of the people quietly funding MUGABE ISLAND IS A RUSSIAN!
No sir, to your substantive point, Come Sing a Song ‘s lips are too firmly applied to the Mottleyian adipose region to permit him to speak about these bombers
This is big feller politics Ping Pong not Pornville lil games ting you capiche?
LikeLike
If Barbados debt ratio was 150% depending on which number you pick with foreign loan obligations in the next 12 months to wipe out the four or five weeks foreign reserves inherited- tell us how do you propose the government should manage the situation in the short term.
We are all ears.
LikeLike
Bush Tea Dec 28@11.27p
My thoughts exactly.If Yahweh/Jesus shared space with that moron,he would make him swear.
LikeLike
That is really not the substantive point Honourable Blogmaster.
In fact it is a matter of record that the concept of *** was provided to ***.
But the point being made here is that Come Sing a Song IS BRIDLED AND CANNOT SPEAK!
You are commingling issues.
Mugabe DID NOT HAVE A CHOICE OTHER THAN STAVE THE HAEMORRHAGE
HOW SHE DID IT WAS WRONG NOT WHY. I agree with the why, in fact, I’d have recommended it, if I was one of her advisors heheheheheh
The issue here is that Come Sing a Song THE DOG? CANNOT BITE THE HAND OF MUGABE THAT IS FEEDING HIM.
Concomitantly, Sing Along cant speak about Venezuela BDCAUSE IT IS IN DIRECT CONTENTION WITH the underwriters of the loans that are propping up the Barbados economy.
Two completely different topics but the difference here is that, the usual loquaciousness of Come Sing a Song on His Maduro hero, it noticeably absent, and his accustomed sovereignty chant is gone
LikeLike
David
Matter heading to court, as expected. All of this is about dividing and adding.
65 seats in a parliament and all this is about determining what is 50% plus 1
Is the answer 33.5 or 34
A parliament of a sovereign Caribbean nation and a high court will seeking to find the existence of a half of a Guyanese.
Oh jesus christ, are we not the laughing stock of the world?
LikeLike
@Pacha
To be fair these things must be clear. Wasn’t a similar change made to the T&T legislation when AR Robinson as Speaker.
LikeLike
LikeLike
What is playing out in Guyana has implications for countries like Barbados that have been encouraging investment over there. Who wants to invest in a politically unstable place?
LikeLike
Guyanese were thought of as the most hospitable folk of the ES Caribbean countries.That was until the 60’s when Jagan and his political ideologies entered the political fray.The cream of the crop ran to Barbados,the U.K. Canada and the USA leaving behind the majority which contributed to the current political turmoil that sees the Indian element as fully on board in their Hinduism,Indianism, societal indignities of caste and privilege and the crass lowlifes whose weapon of choice is the proverbial ‘chopper’,in a country rich with minerals and its own University.Jagdeo is worse than Trump when it comes to lies and deviousness.If we are not careful with those sugar factories closing and oil on the horizon(pun intended)the flares might not only be on the platforms in the Atlantic. There will be no Royal Fusiliers and Argyll Highlanders to keep the peace.Sir Shridath and the old brigade of ‘consciousness’ are not in the mix of this Jagdeo cabal.
LikeLike
Pingback: Jagdeo Desperate to Grab Oil Money | Barbados Underground
@ Gabriel
CARICOM or as a fellow blogger here calls it CARIGONE, IS A FELINE WITHOUT TEETH.
By feline we are not talking about tigers or lions WE ARE TALKING PUSSY CATS, EMPHASIS ON PUSSY.
This incident about sovereignty of country and border incursion now commingled with Russian bombers in nearby Venezuela brings a completely different dimension to the festering and purposed interacial conflict that has characterized the Burnham Guyana social experiment and which one can say infects Trinidad and Barbados as well.
The governance models of our countries HAVE NOT MATURED BECAUSE NONE OF THE GOVERNMENTS THAT WE ELECT are mature enough to issue in administrations that are mature so what obtains at a national level, DIVISIVENESS AND RACIAL STRIFE, permeates our regional institutions
And, as is evidenced globally, the problem is not limited to us alone BUT THE GEOPOLITICS THAT ARE AT PLAY are our collective enemies.
For, as inept as we are, mentally, incapable as we have been to advance initiatives for our common good whether at CARICOM OR AT OUR NATIONAL LEVEL, we do not have any Royal Fusiliers as you pointed out.
But what in so much worse is that, given the evolution of the threat, for it is no longer one like the Grenada invasion, the weapons that will be employed WILL NOT BE LIKE THAT INVASION because US anti non US sentiments, AT THIS TIME, will not, WILL NOT SACRIFICE US LIVES, in these “shithole countries ”
What will be brought to bear on the threat to US interests will be FIRE AND FURY that will obliterate the perceived threat and WILL NOT DISCRIMINATE between ethnic minorities or negro, Indian or chinese majorities
They will eradicate the threat WITH EXTREME PREJUDICE
And this is what your impotent buddy Come Sing a Song nor any of our regional players cannot see AS WE ENTER INTO A PERIOD OF WAR IN THE EAST AND WAR IN THE WEST
Either we break down these mindless ethnic battles and purposed social combats OR WE ALL DIE IN THE ENSUING WARS
LikeLike