It started in 2018 after the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) handed the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) and the third parties an unprecedented 30 to zero drubbing in the general election. Many still believe a constitutional crisis was averted when Bishop Joe Atherley crossed the floor and a Leader of the Opposition (LoO) was recognized to ensure the business of parliament as outlined in the Constitution was carried out.

Who would have thunk it?

Prime Minister Mottley called a snap general election 18 months early and repeated a 30 to love win on 19 January 2022. On this occasion, no sitting MP seems willing to follow in the Bishop’s footsteps. The President of the Republic is unwilling to exercise discretion to appoint 2 Opposition Senators. Prime Minister Mottley in her infinite wisdom magnanimously has started the process to amend the Barbados Constitution to allow for the appointment of the 2 Opposition Senators from the losing political party that garnered the most votes. If that party refuses the opportunity to appoint slides to the next losing party. 

Here we are!

The news former Attorney General Adriel Brathwaite filed a motion with the Court to rule on the legitimacy of the Senate should not surprise political pundits if one listened to the position of interim President of the DLP Steve Blackett. With the amendment to the Constitution proceeding in the parliament the DLP would eventually be forced into position of accepting the offer to appoint 2 Opposition Senators which would contradict the publicly stated position of the DLP represented by interim President Steve Blackett. 

A couple interesting sidebar observations. The former AG Brathwaite is being represented by attorneys-at-law Garth Patterson and Michelle Russell. Last week Brasstacks talk show host Glyne Murray observed the lawyers keeping the most ‘noise’ in the Barbados space on the the constitutionality of parliament are of Jamaican lineage. In fairness to Russell and Patterson they have been residing in Barbados for a long time, however, the blogmaster understands Murray’s point given the large cohort of Barbadians lawyers educated with our tax dollars.

One of the reasons forwarded why Mottley called an early general election was to quell an uprising by a faction in the BLP. Is it reasonable to opine if a few BLP MPs are dissatisfied with Mottley’s leadership a golden opportunity now presents itself for the malcontents to express themselves by crossing the floor or sounding their voices?

Political Games

The matter has gone the route of the Court and whatever the decision at first instance is will likely progress to the CCJ. What we have is a people suffering from economic fatigue, COVID-19 fatigue and you may add to the maladies, post election fatigue. Is this another opportunities to blame lawyers? 

Former Brathwaite in his released stated in part that he felt “compelled to seek the intervention of the Courts to resolve this controversy, one that centres around issues of vital national importance, and goes to the root of our democracy.” The blogmaster notes the former AG has advised that the matter is being brought in his capacity as a private citizen. How convenient!

Why did this extract from Brathwaite’s statement pique the interest of the blogmaster? Under Brathwaite’s tenure as AG with responsibility for the judiciary, he left it in a worse condition than he found it. The political games that lawyer politicians play mean an already congested court system has to adjudicate a matter created by lawyers. 

494 responses to “To the Courts!”


  1. @🐇/🐰
    It would be amusing (to me) if for some reason they decided to hold elections again and got another 30-0.


  2. @Artax
    Given that this is 2020, with impressive technology, are you good with an electoral system where 40% of the voters can vote for a party group, but the opposing group with 51%, can conceivable gain 100% of the seats?
    Do you think that more people would take the effort to vote if they felt that THEIR VOTE actually COUNTS for something? (eg difference between 20% and 25% could be meaningful)
    As opposed to the current idiocy where once a candidate is assured 50% +1 vote the show is over…. mostly in the voter’s mind.

    The whole system is flawed and outdated. This ‘first past the post’ thing was better than our grand parents had, but is it adequate for our children..?
    The system has been trying to tell us that it wanted changing for YEARS now… but we just want to cling to the past.

    Perhaps elections should not be called off… but we should eat CROW and do another Atherley move ..and then PROPERLY fix the whole system.

  3. NorthernObserver Avatar

    @Hants
    Didn’t our PM pull an identical election move? It was, as was the case in Barbados, legal. And somewhat interestingly, both elections produced results almost identical to the previous one.


  4. @ Bushie

    I understand your point, but the problem is there are several other reasons why people choose not to vote.

    I agree with you that the “system has been trying to tell us that it wanted changing for YEARS now,” and perhaps even more so after the DEMS won 24-3 in the 1986 general elections…… and also in 1999 when there was a 26-2 result in the BLP’s favour.

    Another opportunity came during Mottley’s 2018-2022 tenure in office. I believe the appropriate time to address the 30-0 issue, was in a revised Constitution, accompanying the island moving to Republic status.

    But, both DLP & BLP administrations found it necessary to make constitutional amendments to facilitate the appointment of friends as Chief Justice or non-residents and 18 year old party supporters to the Senate


  5. TheOGazertsFebruary 11, 2022 3:11 PM

    @🐇/🐰
    It would be amusing (to me) if for some reason they decided to hold elections again and got another 30-0.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    If elections are called again it will be in the wake of mass resignations.

    The Chief Justice would be the acting GG/President.

    As Peter Wickham says, the outcome of the court case would be seismic!!

    The DLP might end up with 30 seats!!


  6. The position of the GG has been compromised since 2018 by “The Atherly Move”.


  7. @🐇/🐰
    “The DLP might end up with 30 seats!!”

    😂Like a fool … Down the hole I come
    😂 Makes me wonder who would be voting? Bajans??

  8. NorthernObserver Avatar

    @SteveP
    It is not a matter of the President acting ‘unconstitutionally’, rather the President is not seen to be acting at all.
    Where there is a vacancy in the LoO because there is no one qualified, nor anyone willing to cross, the President is to act as if LoO in appointing two Opposition senators.
    Her nominees can be anyone who in the President’s opinion will ‘best’ provide a voice of Opposition. (discretion)
    Exactly why the PM spoke on a matter beyond her remit, is unknown. The PM, even if the matter of two Opposition Senators had been discussed with the President, had no reason to convey this decision. It is, the President’s job. And any offer of a Senate position is to A PERSON, not a party, even if the President sought input from persons deemed to be senior Party members.
    It is further unknown why the PM, rather than recommending 12 persons who were all eligible, opted to muddy the waters, by having one who was ineligible pending Constitutional change. And, where the said ineligible Senator, claimed to have no knowledge of his pending appointment. This is unnecessary behaviour. Also unacceptable.
    I have used this as another reason why the President needs to be elected, and function in an autonomous manner.
    Let’s also appreciate, the President is free to reject any person recommended who is ineligible to serve?
    I would recommend the immediate replacement of the current President, who is obviously incapable of executing the duties of the office.

  9. African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved Avatar
    African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved

  10. @Northern

    Don’t we have two issues here:

    1: President not exercising her discretion.

    2: PM Mottley’s desire to change the constitution to permit appointment from losing parties.

    This smells like a collaboration or collusion gone south.


  11. @ NorthernObserver,

    The Federal elections are contested by 4 mainstream parties. It made sense to me for the Liberals to try to get a 2/3 majority.

    https://www.elections.ca/enr/help/national_e.htm


  12. She was to be the first female PM of Barbados ever.

    Every trick in the book had to be used to get that to happen.

    30 – 0 is a farce and cannot work for the simple reason that in a Parliamentary Democracy there must be an opposition!!

    The evidence of Keith Mitchell’s gymnastics was there to see.

    Old time Bajans would have laughed at what he did and claim it could never happen here.

    The GG should have called fresh elections back then instead of accepting the Reverent Joe.

    Ms. Mockley and the GG would have come out smelling like two roses, statesmen whose stature would have increased immensely.

    They should have stood four square behind the constitution.

    Now, they face possible disgrace abd the possibility that Bajans will never again accept any women leaders.

    You makes your bed and you lies in it,

    The DLP chose the high road.

    They may be a bunch of jokers, but on this one they were 100% right and played it by the book.


  13. Many people seek refuge in drugs to escape our reality. Similarly, our BU commentators in opposition are living in an alternate reality.

    You must finally acknowledge that Barbados is a one-party democracy because the people want it that way. Barrow is no longer the founder of the DLP but the mentor of our Supreme Leader.

    Tron,
    year 1 of the New Republic
    year 4 of our Supreme Leader


  14. The judge didn’t find or couldn’t find a reason to dismiss this case
    I guess she might be thinking other judges on the CCJ is looking or reading about this case
    Hence she has to take the correct path instead of looking like a govt sympathizer


  15. @Dee Word

    A simple case of misspeaking, it happens.


  16. How could the judge dismiss the case when this morning was haggling over case management issues?

  17. NorthernObserver Avatar

    @David
    As PM, it is within the PMs remit, to propose changes to the Constitution. However, to propose appointments today for changes to occur in future is not. Make the change, and then make the appointment? The concept of persons “acting” is very common in Barbados. Isn’t this what was done with Sen McC and Adams.


  18. @NO

    No disagreement.

  19. Vincent Codrington Avatar
    Vincent Codrington

    @ Bush Tee .
    Your argument is flawed. In your system the leader(s)’ of that party determine the representatives of the people not the people. Is that Democracy? When the PM determines who joins her Cabinet,is that democratic? It is democratic when the members of a party with the largest following select the “Primus inter pares.” From that moment on the “inter pares” disappears.

  20. NorthernObserver Avatar

    @Hants
    So you could understand the benefit of a potential majority, but couldn’t foresee the potential consequences of increased negatives in 18 months?
    There is always a certain amount of infighting within political parties. There was plenty within the Libs, and varied. There may also have been within the BLP. And both could have lost power?
    Wait 18 months and see if you can find reasons why PM Mottley made the call

  21. African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved Avatar
    African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved

    We all know how some people …no names…don’t like submitting timely submissions…but what do i know…they got all the TIME IN THE WORLD…

    could not resist that one..personal experience..


  22. John you sound like a blasted parrot.Everday with the same shite.No government no senate go back to the polls.You have any idea of the expense that would involve and as likely the results are the same then what go back again? Then talking shite about the DLP taking the high road.What high road is that? How come they are so honourable and cannot win a seat in two elections albeit with two very poor leaders.You think repeating the same thing every day makes you right.Go take your meds.I gone.


  23. Read Garth Patterson on the Irish Precedent and you will see how this case is possibly decided already.

    Sure there will be kicking and screaming from the AG (ag or not) but the result is practically a foregone conclusion.

    21 seats needed to constitute the senate.


  24. Who was the judge?


  25. I am sharing a very clear explanation authored by attorney-at-law Tricia Watson for the benefit of those who still don’t understand why thinking citizens are worried:

    the president sets the precedent

    that attorney is an overpaid fool

  26. de pedantic Dribbler Avatar
    de pedantic Dribbler

    Yes @David, ‘misspeak’ due to equipment bother. Much thanks.

    So to reinforce @Northern’s point when he so bluntly (and correctly) opines: “I would recommend the immediate replacement [resignation] of the current President, who is obviously incapable of executing the duties of the office.”

    This is now going into the absurd. When lay-persons (albeit of high caliber) like himself and @Vincent et al can so clearly see the waste, absurdity and shenanigans afoot and the leadership simply refuses to correct their unnecessary negligence then we have a grave problem.

    I asked prior and I make the same disturbing accusation again: is Madame President circumscribed by that 4 year rule proposed re the Presidential tenure… and thus feels obliged to accommodate the PM is her ridiculous illegal offer.?

    @Northern spoke wisely when he said: “Exactly why the PM spoke on a matter beyond her remit, is unknown. The PM, even if the matter of two Opposition Senators had been discussed with the President, had no reason to convey this decision. It is, the President’s job. And any offer of a Senate position is to A PERSON, not a party, even if the President sought input from persons deemed to be senior Party members.”

    That is sound, ethical and rationale thinking…. EXACTLY the type of judicious reasoning we expect of a former Justice.

    Regardless of final decision .
    if this matter reaches the CCJ they will be SCATHING… is THAT what a former high judicial officer wants to be remembered for.

    This is A NONSENSE. Our Nation does NOT deserve this wasteful folly as both @Northern and @Vincent and others has already sagely noted.

    Bloggers repeatedly asked why the PM called these elections … that’s irrelevant now …. but WHY the badword is she effecting this current folly!

    We desperately need some answers to that … and why are our other MPs so damn silent (Rihanna style BS all over again).

    Unbelievable.

    One item @Northern, I don’t believe,however, that this folly is “another reason why the President needs to be elected”. If the role is non-excutive then elections are a waste of money IMHO.


  27. angela coxFebruary 11, 2022 4:50 PM

    The judge didn’t find or couldn’t find a reason to dismiss this case
    I guess she might be thinking other judges on the CCJ is looking or reading about this case
    Hence she has to take the correct path instead of looking like a govt sympathizer

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    The Judge is led by precedent.

    Unless something weird happens here it will be the AG (ag or not) who will end up taking the matter to the CCJ.


  28. Something we learned coming out of the hearing this morning reported by VOB is that the upper house didn’t meet this week because of being compromised by covid. Why was it not made public?


  29. Why do bloggers keep asking why the pm called elections like bloody parrots copying one another when I have already told them?

    She called them because she needs a constitutional Parliament to ratify the past decisions of an unconstitutional Parliament which may become null, void and of no effect.

    She has jumped out of the frying pan into the fire.

    I see I am getting some bloggers to come around to my point of view … hope springs eternal …

  30. de pedantic Dribbler Avatar
    de pedantic Dribbler

    @David, LOL🤣 … what’s the new protocol for covid infections again…. didn’t the CDC just issue a ruling saying that person should stay away until courts cases are resolved or the President can safely and effectively take off her mask!

    Anyhow, I may be wrong tho and badly conflating things … it might have been MAM who so ruled …NOT the CDC!🤦🏾‍♂️🙈🙊🙉.

  31. de pedantic Dribbler Avatar
    de pedantic Dribbler

    When one is writing piffle .. Confucius says ‘much mistake make!

    😇


  32. Court hearings are still conducted in Barbados by teleconferencing.

    It is rare cases that are conducted live, like the one Grenville described in his recent blog.

    I am beginning to think it is better to have the cases conducted by teleconference as everyone, including the Judge, is under the spotlight and the potential for recording for rebroadcast is there.

    In which case the Supreme Court Building at White Park, the property of CLICO I believe is a white elephant.

  33. NorthernObserver Avatar

    @VC
    While your are correct, it is also possible any leader be required to have a slate of persons who will serve in senior executive positions.
    Even in our current system and with a 30-0 victory, certain elected MPs are overlooked in favour on unelected individuals. Prior to the last election, Ministers Walcott, McConney and Cummins (and previously Moe) were all unelected.
    Where a slate of senior executives is used, the resignation or removal of X, like a no confidence motion, can force an election.
    In 2015, in Canada, the Liberal leader Trudeau, promised Canadians, if elected, it would be the last under a FPTP system. This appealed to the youth, who supported the idea in large numbers. Once elected, it was realized they could NOT have won a majority under any of the alternative systems. The idea to change was squashed.
    They have failed to attain a similar majority in two subsequent elections.

  34. NorthernObserver Avatar

    @dpd
    Your reasoning behind electing only executive officeholders is appreciated. However, the President HAS extensive power. So extensive, that ‘interference’ should never be hinted at, and there is nothing potentially detracting from exercising their duties.
    Sadly, I appreciate any election, will likely have the candidates be tied to either the red or blue umbrella. And the quality may not be as high as appointees.

  35. African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved Avatar
    African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved

    “You have any idea of the expense that would involve”

    and who got those rooms filled with money to throw around 2wice in one year…

    yeah man, nuff, nuff expense seeing as ya would have to have a BUY ELECTION AGAIN…..lawd….lol

    oh what a tangled web “we” weave…..finish it Lorenza…sing the chorus…

  36. Critical Analyzer Avatar
    Critical Analyzer

    @angela cox February 11, 2022 1:40 PM

    (3) The Constitution of Barbados states that where there is a vacancy in the office of the LOO, the President shall (again imperative) act in her own discretion in matters where the Constitution requires that she act on the advice of the LOO. That provision is clear and unambiguous.

    This says to me, in the absence of the LOO, the President can choose to perform or not to perform any of their duties so the President can choose to do nothing and keep quiet.

    (4) The Constitution of Barbados states that to change all of the provisions that I have referred to, there shall be 2/3 support of the votes of all of the members of each House. Not some of them. Not a quorum. All of them; i.e. 21 senators and 30 members of the Lower House. That provision is clear and unambiguous.

    This says 2/3 of the upper and lower houses have to vote yes to pass any constitutional changes. So once 14 senators and 20 MPs attend parliament and vote yes in support of any constitutional changes, it passes regardless of how many overall attend a parliament session once they get the majority required.

    If all members must be present instead of the majority number required to pass legislation you are insinuating, then that would also mean nothing can be voted on without all members present.

    If there is a problem with the constitutional amendment, it stems from its introduction of a political party not recognized anywhere in the constitution.


  37. @ Davd February 11, 2022 4:58 PM
    (Quote):
    @NO
    No disagreement.
    (Unquote).
    +++++++++++++++++++++++

    There cannot be!
    What “NO” has posited is well within the realm of proper governance, within the boundaries set by the Constitution and based soundly on the well-established principles of parliamentary democracy.

    As it stands, there is nothing deficient in the Constitution to hamstring the functioning of the State.

    Why is there this pressing need to have members in the Upper Chamber representing some imaginary Opposition from some unrecognized political entity when there is None in the people’s elected Assembly?

    What difference would it make to the performance of the government even involving any future amendments to the Constitution?

    Do two-thirds of 21 no longer equal 14 and not 20 or 21?

    How about amending the same Constitution by tinkering with it to ensure that there are at least two members to the HoA to represent the “Opposition” where there are NO elected members prepared to function in that capacity?

    How about providing for an additional two seats in the HoA to be taken by the two losing candidates who received the second and third highest votes in any general elections to the HoA, or any vacancy therein?


  38. Watching the creation of Frankenstein monster. If I can contribute a limb to this monster here it is…. Perhaps, two senatorial seats be held by members from the diaspora …

    Impractical! Nonsense! I am exercising the same right as the others. The right to write to right the flaws in the system.

    I could have written.. unable to contribute.

  39. Critical Analyzer Avatar
    Critical Analyzer

    @David February 11, 2022 5:27 PM

    Simple answer, they hiding the fact the prettycols are bollocks and not working as intended.


  40. Has the republic of Barbados flopped already in 2 months flat


  41. Premier Ford declares state of emergency in Ontario over protests, blockade

    https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/premier-ford-declares-state-of-emergency-in-ontario-over-protests-blockade-1.5777398


  42. Black parliamentarians say protest convoy is a venue for ‘white supremacists’
    Social Sharing

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/convoy-covid-vaccines-ottawa-black-parliamentary-1.6338720


  43. Hants

    Looks like riots up your side.

    You better buy some supplies and hunker down.


  44. The Americans coming!!


  45. PM MIA was presented as an Exceptional leader, ” Boss ” lady and Champion of Caribbean Unity.

    She strutted on the ” World Stage ” among the leaders of the G7 while ” punching above our weight “.

    What did we expect ?

    This discombobulation of the constitution is a minor ” glitch ” in her continuing climb and continuous improvement of all things Barbados.

    I wish she could help me improve my writing skills but I could ask UncleJeff and Auntie Sandy. lol


  46. A more serious note.

    Surely, there is one of the 30 who can utter the words “Mia, for my country sake, I must leave the herd. I am the LoO”

    It’s not calculus


  47. TheOGazertsFebruary 11, 2022 7:33 PM

    A more serious note.

    Surely, there is one of the 30 who can utter the words “Mia, for my country sake, I must leave the herd. I am the LoO”

    It’s not calculus

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Grasshopper

    No body is going push their necks out for Ms. Mockley.

    Its politics and its a blood sport.

    There were supposedly 14+ who were at odds with her before elections.

    Obviously none of them want Ms. Mockley as a bedfellow and will throw her to the wolves.

    If they keep quiet she goes down in flames.

    She and the GG have made them complicit in the 2018 insurrection to subvert the constitution.

    We may be watching the last act of the BLP!!

    Time will tell but politics is a blood sport.

    Possibly you ware going to see resignations and a new elections.

    The options appear to be running out for the Supreme leader.


  48. 21 to 18 x 2

    2 simple changes need to be make to the Old Time Constitution

    21 Senators changed to 18
    21 Age Limit changed to 18


  49. Why can’t 10 of the 30 declare themselves to be the ” parliamentary opposition ” and with the blessings of PM MIA and the President ?

    May as well have a mo betta fake opposition.


  50. @TheOGazerts February 11, 2022 7:33 PM ”

    But why?Surely, there is one of the 30 who can utter the words “Mia, for my country sake, I must leave the herd. I am the LoO”

    But why?

    I’ve voted for the DLP as often as I have voted for the BLP.

    I vote both for the party and the MP.

    I would be upset if my MP betrayed me by crossing the floor.

    If the DLP partisans are pushing for this it may persuade me to NEVER EVER vote for the DLP sgain.

Leave a Reply to IkandolCancel reply

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading