Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

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. 


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

494 responses to “To the Courts!”


  1. Even if a BLP MP were to cross the floor it doesn’t respond to the fact that person didn’t present to the electorate with a dissenting platform. It would be like Atherley did a matter of convenience. This is a lacuna in the law we must fix in a more structured way.

  2. Vincent Codrington Avatar
    Vincent Codrington

    @ David Bu at 12 :12 PM
    I am quite aware of the linear approach that led you to that conclusion; hence the uptick. Donna is hinting that the President will exercise her discretion. I empathize with your impatience..


  3. @Vincent

    The time is gone for the President to exercise discretion. We’re she to do so now it makes a mockery of proceeding unless she is so directed.


  4. (1) Whenever the office of Governor-General is vacant or the holder of the office is absent from Barbados or is for any .
    other reason unable to perform the functions of his office, those functions shall be performed-

    (a) by any person for the time being designated by Her Majesty in that behalf who is in Barbados and able to
    perform those functions; or

    (b) at any time when there is no person in Barbados so designated and able to perform those functions, by the
    holder of the office of Chief Justice; or

    (c) at any time referred to in paragraph (b) when the office of Chief Justice is vacant or the holder thereof is absent
    from Barbados or is for any other reason unable to perform those functions, by the President of the Senate.

    (2) The holder of the office of Governor-General or any person designated under paragraph (a) or by paragraph (b) of
    subsection (1) shall not, for the purposes of this section, be regarded as absent from Barbados or as unable to perform the
    functions of the office of Governor-General at any time when there is a subsisting appointment of a deputy under section 30.

    (1) Whenever the Governor-General-

    (a) has occasion to be absent from Barbados for a period which he has reason to believe will be of short duration; or

    (b) is suffering from an illness that he has reason to believe will be of short duration, he may, acting in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister, by instrument under the Public Seal, appoint any person in Barbados to be his deputy during such absence or illness and in that capacity to perform on his behalf such of the functions of the office of Governor-General as may be specified in that instrument.

    (2) The power and authority of the Governor-General shall not be abridged, altered or in any way affected by the appointment of a deputy under this section, and in the exercise of any function that is exercisable by the Governor-General acting in his discretion or after consultation with any person or authority a deputy shall conform to and observe any instructions that the Governor-General, acting in like manner, may address to him :

    Provided that the question whether or not a deputy has conformed to or observed any such instructions shall not be enquired into in any court.

    (3) A person appointed as a deputy under this section shall hold that appointment for such period as may be specified in
    the instrument by which he is appointed, and his appointment may be revoked at any time by the Governor-General acting
    in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister.


  5. I see the new favorite word is discretion. That is a fail-safe and may not be needed.

    I believe we will get the needed opposition

  6. Vincent Codrington Avatar
    Vincent Codrington

    @ David Bu at 12 :47 PM

    Quite a few people need their feet held to the fire. Directed by whom? Where does the constitution empower that?


  7. This has nothing to do with favourite word, it is one written into the Constitution to address the matter under dispute.


  8. @Vincent

    See the Constitution as guiding principles, it does not obviate office holders from conducting their responsibilities with integrity.

  9. Vincent Codrington Avatar
    Vincent Codrington

    @ David BU.

    We take our integrity with us into public office.One does not get it by osmosis from our posts.


  10. Vincent,

    Huh????? You think I said you spoke out of turn?????

    I said MIA spoke out of turn offering the seats to the DLP. It seems that it should have been the President.

    Perhaps my errors and omissions AND CORRECTIONS confused you.

    I thought I was agreeing with your position.


  11. If the president resigns at this stage of the game, how will a new one be elected?

    I suspect Parliament does that job in which case de dog ded!!!!

    Check and see if I am right.


  12. Artax,

    Anybody with a brain knows that there can be no new election that guarantees a LoO and therefore that cannot be the solution.

    Anybody with a brain knows that it was never the intention of those who wrote the Constitution that somebody should commit to opposing for opposing’s sake. As Vincent said, the House of Assembly was not meant to be a debating society.


  13. If for some reason the “President” becomes unable to fulfil his/her duties, the PM and Leader of the Opposition determine who will act in his/her place!!!

    Only people above a certain pay grade could come up with something as crazy as this.

    The extent of the craziness is exposed by our current situation.

    “Acting President
    Where the office of President is vacant or the President is incapable of performing the functions of President by reason of illness or absence from Barbados or is on vacation leave or for any other reason unable to perform the functions of the office, the Prime Minister shall, after consultation with the Leader of the Opposition, appoint a person who is qualified to be elected to the office of President to act during the vacancy or as the case may be, during the absence of the President.”

    There shall be a leader of the opposition.

    Even the amendments say so.

    Only problem, in the ABSENCE OF THE PRESENCE of the Leader of the Opposition, a vacancy in the office of the President, were it to arise cannot be filled!!

    The safest thing is to go back to square one and leave it so HRH appoints the GG because whoever came up with the amendments had no concept of continuity.

    We just ain’t ready for this Republic thing, it is a farce exposed by the 30 – 0 farce.

    Correct me if I am wrong.

    The amendment needs to be amended before it even gets ratified!!

  14. Vincent Codrington Avatar
    Vincent Codrington

    There is no lacuna in the law. You may fill this lacuna and create a dozen more. This is a matter to which the Constitution has loudly spoken.


  15. @Vincent

    Unfortunately integrity and moral fibre can be challenged in situations.


  16. @Donna

    We have addressed the fact matter before the court does not address any new general election.


  17. @Vincent

    Justice Cumberbatch addressed the turgid nature how the Barbados Constitution is written compared to others in the region which might explain the myriad of interpretations.


  18. Vincent
    The Constitution is being heard though, the lady is exercising her discretion not to appoint a fella. Yuh see how labour kept noise after she appointed her independents?


  19. Barbados is like a Marx Brothers movie.

    “If there isn’t an option in the Constitution to cover the situation where there is no opposition seats in Parliament after an election and hence no blooming Leader of the opposition to be found, one should put one in” says Queen Elisa (ex-head of the land)
    “This ain’t Rocket Science.”

    2018 there was a fudge fix where geezer left the party
    2022 there was bewilderment and a court case to clarify what the hell the numpties should do

    God Speed Republic of Barbados
    Do not falter stutter or stumble in new era of glorious and spectacular self rule making history


  20. Dear Steve Prescott,

    I am sorry if I made you clutch your pearls but I was told that this is a rumshop.

    I myself have been called everything from asshole to cunthole for far less than the jobby you dropped on the blog.

    I took off my pearls.

    When you can make Vincent Codrington cuss by proxy you have to deserve the tongue lashing!


  21. Enuff,

    The appointments do not have to be political. She can appoint whomsoever she wishes.


  22. Donna
    But it is political no matter how it’s twisted.


  23. DavidFebruary 12, 2022 3:25 PM

    @Vincent

    Justice Cumberbatch addressed the turgid nature how the Barbados Constitution is written compared to others in the region which might explain the myriad of interpretations.

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

    Anyone who has flow charted sequences of events in the writing of software can understand the constitution.

    The language is crystal clear and the logical flow of events it describes is obvious..

    Justice Cumberbatch has probably never written software and flow charted an algorithm of the sequences involved.

    Just following the language is difficult, I agree.

    Lawyers are probably not taught much of computer science.

    You can see the lack of a thoughtful approach in the drafting of the amendment where it is possible for the President to disappear for whatever reason and without a Leader of the Opposition the PM cannot appoint an Acting President because there is no one to consult and everything grinds to a halt.

    The drafter got too caught up in the language.

    Anyone who has written software knows such situations and avoids them.

    Lawyers who concentrate on language and come to the constitution cold are at a disadvantage.

    A programmer will approach it a different way and cut to the chase quickly.


  24. 74(2) Whenever the Governor-General has occasion to appoint a Leader of the Opposition he shall appoint the member of the House of Assembly who, in his judgment, is best able to command the support of a majority of those members who do not support the Government, or if there is no such person, the member of that House who, in his judgment, commands the
    support of the largest single group of such members who are prepared to support one leader:

    Provided that this subsection shall have effect in relation to any period between a dissolution of Parliament and the day on which the next election of members of the House of Assembly is held as if Parliament had not been dissolved.

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

    74 comes before 75 because before a vacancy can exist in the office of the Leader of the Opposition, the GG/President has to appoint a Leader of the Opposition.

    The sequence is first appoint a LOTO as per 74 then if it becomes vacant subsequently move on to 75.

    In a flowchart, 74 would come before 75.

    After 74 there would be a test to see if the post is vacant.

    If it is, then 75 is executed in the program before moving to 76.

    If it isn’t, then 76 is executed with no reference to 75.

    That is consistent with the Reverent Joe scenario where he made it plain he was filling THE ABSENCE OF A PRESENCE, not a VACANCY in the post.

    He was being used by the GG to create or bring into existence the post of Leader of the Opposition which had ceased to exist when Parliament was prorogued (I love dat word)!!


  25. Let me see if I can find some free flowcharting software and draw it out for you.

    The sharper tacks who understand what I am saying can get on with the job too.

    https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/best-free-flowchart-tools-windows/


  26. John
    So Jamaica’s govt of 1983-89 was unconstitutional?


  27. Tell us about Jamaica and its constitution and what happened in 1983.


  28. @ John February 12, 2022 6:19 PM
    “Tell us about Jamaica and its constitution and what happened in 1983.”
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Please John, please don’t to that to the fella.

    Let him take himself down his home-made cul-de-sac just like he did in arguing for the legality of appointing two deputies in one legally established post of DCOP.

    The mere fact he has the xenophobic indecency to refer to the Jamaican origin of two of the legal luminaries in the case before a Bajan justice system-not really the brightest star in the eyes of the CCJ)- says a lot about the guy and his jingoistic hatred of his Caricom brothers and sisters; as if they attended a completely different Law school and hold no LEC like his Boss Lady.


  29. Someone needs to challenge the constitutionality of the Government and a court has to rule.

    That is being done but as they say, there’s many a slip between the cup and the lip.

    Rumour has it that Jeff Bezos’ yacht anchored off Port St. Charles.


  30. Miller
    Where did I exhibit this xenophobia? You must always tell lies to try to get at me. Poor fella.


  31. John
    Was there a LOO in the lower house of Grenada between 2013 and 2019 prior to the resignation of one MP the govt?


  32. As far as I understand, the House of Assembly shall have 30 members. What would happen if after a general election only 29 seats were declared because 2 candidates in the 30th constituency received the same number of votes? Would that mean that Parliament could not function until after a new election was held in the 30th constituency? Just asking. Maybe the experts on this blog can help me


  33. Enuff

    Any clap trap Government will work so long as no person with standing challenges its constitutionality in court.

    If such a person does, and it is found to be unconstitutional, then everything it has done is null, void and no effect.

    So, it is in the interest of a Government to get it right, particularly if there are such persons it knows will fight in court.

    But an unconstitutional government can work if it is allowed to and its actions remain unchallenged, like Freddie Mercury, it becomes the Great Pretender.

    Adriel Braithwaite is a citizen of Barbados who is challenging the constitutionality of the Parliament/Government which he says is unconstitutionally formed because of the makeup of the Senate.

    His association with the DLP is irrelevant.

    If the court rules in Citizen Braithwaithe’s favour, everything the unconstitutional parliament/government does will be ruled null void and no effect until all the seats in the senate are filled.

    To fill them, a Leader of the Opposition is mandatory as he/she has to advise the GG on which 2 senators to appoint.

    I say the Government after 2018 was unconstitutional because there was no Leader of the Opposition properly appointed by the GG according to the constitution.

    She has to use her judgement, not her discretion in making the appointment of the Leader of the Opposition, thereby creating the post. .

    If I were to go to court and win, then everything the unconstitutionally declared Government has done would be null void and of no effect.

    Point is, so long as there is no legal challenge by a qualified person with standing any Freddie Mercury government will work.

    Likewise, any citizen could take the Government to court and potentially get a ruling it was unconstitutional.

    A citizen in Jamaica or Grenada would have to challenge the constitutionality of the government in their countries in the court in their jurisdiction and win for their Government to be declared unconstitutional.

    Same principle.

    There is a problem however, … can any one spot it?

    What if the court rules wrongly in the view of some other qualified person and after Citizen Braithwaite is finished, can the other qualified person be precluded from litigating the same point again?

    I refer of course to the filling of the “PHYSICAL ABSENCE OF A PRESENCE” before the post can be vacant.

    If the Court rules there is a vacancy in the post and the President can use her discretion and act and not a “PHYSICAL ABSENCE OF A PRESENCE” she has to create can some qualified person argue that point or is it considered already litigated.

    In my view, Citizen Braithwaite should argue that point as well!!


  34. DavidFebruary 12, 2022 12:12 PM

    @Vincent

    The President didn’t exercise discretion which created the situation being challenged by Patterson with the help of Adriel Brathwaite.

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

    She can’t exercise discretion in appointing senators UNTIL SHE HAS EXERCISED HER JUDGMENT AND BROUGHT THE POST OF THE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION INTO BEING FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED VACANT.

    If and when it becomes vacant she can exercise her DISCRETION if required but until then she is constrained to apply her JUDGMENT..

    30 – 0 means it is impossible for any reasonable person to JUDGE that there is an opposition and thus a leader of the opposition.

    She would be laughed out of Government House as she and Reverent Joe should have been in 2018 when Reverent Joe appeared on her doorstep claiming to have chosen himself as the Leader of the Opposition.

    JUDGMENT FIRST, THEN DISCRETION.

    She needs to bring the post of Leader of the Opposition into existence USING HER JUDGMENT before she can be accused of not using her DISCRETION.

    So far, her JUDGMENT this time around seems to be working fine as it is impossible for there to be a leader of the opposition.

    She is right so far.

    No one has turned up on her doorstep claiming to be the Leader of the Opposition so she does not have to use her JUDGMENT..


  35. Not that it will matter in the overall scheme of things…
    But the moral of this story is that there is a DEFINITE requirement for sharp-minded scholars in any society that expects to be successful…. EVEN if these bright sparks are a bit ‘eccentric’
    That FACT is that there are some things that are COMPLEX, and which present a serious QUAGMIRE for the unwary.

    These LAWS that our second-rate lawyers have been putting together over the years (and charging ridiculous fees in the process) require the kind of analytical minds that confound most people.
    What John has been trying to explain inter alia, (and what seem to have eluded most,) is that we have a situation where the LAW specifies that in order for the senate to COMMENCE its existence after having been DISSOLVED in January, there are a number of SPECIFIC conditions to be met FIRST.
    AFTER the senate comes into LEGAL existence, the rules provide for its continuing operation. TWO DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.
    Same with the LEGAL REQUIREMENT of a LoO for various duties.

    For example, in order to CREATE a certain type of company company, you may be required to appoint 3 directors. If you CANNOT find three directors then you CANNOT create the company. If you cannot create the company, THEN there can be no such thing as a VACANCY of directors – there is NOTHING…no company, no directors , no vacancy.
    Once created however, business can continue with fewer directors – if there is a vacancy for sickness or any other reason.

    Clearly, it requires a sharp mind to be able to identify the MULTIPLE possible contingencies that could compromise the intent of new legislation …AND then to write proactive accommodating clauses…which may THEMSELVES be issues.
    Judging from the history of new laws in Barbados; from the CCJ reviews of appeals; and from Caswell’s clear dominance of the market – especially in Labour Law, our legal pencils may be high priced and untouchable…. but they are not particularly sharp.

    So as the world become EVEN more complex, and as we de-emphasis schools like HC and QC …and produce more citizens like (insert names here) instead of Hants, GP, John and NO, we can expect TOTAL chaos in the society …
    LOL
    No wonder the Bible says..
    Except those days be shortened, there will be no brass left alive…..


  36. SpikesFebruary 12, 2022 8:49 PM

    As far as I understand, the House of Assembly shall have 30 members. What would happen if after a general election only 29 seats were declared because 2 candidates in the 30th constituency received the same number of votes? Would that mean that Parliament could not function until after a new election was held in the 30th constituency? Just asking. Maybe the experts on this blog can help me

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

    You would need to see what the Representation of the People Act says in relation to an equality of votes.

    http://www.caribbeanelections.com/eDocs/legislation/bb/bb_%20Represention%20of%20the%20People%20Act-%20CAP12%20-2007-19.pdf

    Where, after the count of the votes (including any re-count) is completed, an equality of votes is found to exist between any candidates and the addition of a vote would entitle any of those candidates to be declared elected, a new writ shall be issued in respect of that constituency and all proceedings for an election of a member for that constituency shall
    commence afresh.

    So the answer is BACK TO THE POLLS!!

    Now where did I hear that before?


  37. I more sure I saw some lunatic on here being writing about going back to polls since the night of the election in 2018.


  38. If there is an inability to form a constitutional Parliament, go back to the people.

    Or you will end up in deep doo doo!!


  39. John
    You’re too funny.🤣🤣🤣

  40. Vincent Codrington Avatar
    Vincent Codrington

    @ John at 5:38 PM

    Most of what you wrote in the above intervention I agree with. But with one proviso. The computer programmer writes for a machine,and man is not a machine. And there are downsides to the mechanistic approach to thinking, Your colleagues on this blog have pointed them out.I too suffer from the auto-correct algorithm in this blog. I have a list of mechanistic changes that it likes to make. I usually check quickly for them But some do slip through.


  41. Vincent
    The difference is that the ‘machine’ is intolerant of errors. whereas people are more flexible.

    Unfortunately, this ‘Error-free’ status is a critical requirement as we increase the complexity of the systems that we utilize.
    The kind of MIND needed to resolve this modern REQUIREMENT of meticulousness is not the regular, cool, fun-loving Bushie-Brass-bowl type, ..it tends to be different (look around BU and see) and it enables them to see things DIFFERENTLY and with more complexity. (It also becomes a challenge for them to explain what seems obvious to them, ..to normal sheeple)
    …unless of course they have a whacker…and speak in parables… ha ha ha

    It takes all types… and in the world of the 2020’s it will be even more complex and confusing…
    Who knows…? Soon, ac may become a national asset.


  42. Here is the picture in my mind.

    Neither of the decision diamonds can be reached because no LOTO has been appointed.

    The only reason the GG/President can’t consult with the LOTO is because she has appointed none.

    It is the 30 – 0 farce/nullity.

    Her judgment must be there is no LOTO, fix it then I will decide.

    It is impossible to determine if the office is vacant so 75 CANNOT be used.

    74 comes before 75!!.

    https://imgur.com/4Um1oS7


  43. Until there is a LOTO she has no discretion and can only use her judgment.


  44. John is no programmer or system designer and has no experience fixing bugs or making modifications for new requirements.
    I can do that shit in my sleep.

    Constitutions are amended. Barbados will soon be implementing Constitutional changes to represent the Republic now it is Independent of the Crown.


  45. Fuss over senators need not be

    Some years ago a lecturer at law school suggested to students that when a client comes to you with a problem, he is not interested in how much law you know – he only wants a solution to his problem.
    I reflected on that advice during the ongoing saga and came to the conclusion that Government could easily abandon its misplaced congeniality to an 18-year-old and appoint someone who qualifies to be in the Senate, allow the President to make the nominations from the opposition party and let’s get on with the business of governance.
    By the way, I was probably the only one in 2018 who thought Bishop [Joseph] Atherley had done this country a great service. Events now have merely underscored the point.
    – Errol E. Niles


    Source: Nation


  46. The ‘Irish Solution’ is not applicable

    By Ezra Alleyne

    The big political event of recent times for me is an article written by Garth Patterson QC, alleging that the Barbados Senate was improperly constituted.
    Of recent times, Patterson has written some articles on public affairs which I have read. This one captioned The Irish Solution prompts my attention. It raises a challenging point rooted in the deeper interstices of the Constitution.
    I regard this latest article by Patterson as continuing in the tradition of raising public awareness of constitutional issues. However, I have serious questions about some of his observations.
    My learned friend in his article last Sunday (February 6) focused on the sections mainly on Sections 35 and 36 of the Constitution.
    Section 36 says that there SHALL be 21 senators, two of whom are appointed by the Leader of the Opposition. But there is no Leader of the Opposition. Eighteen senators only have been appointed as the Government proposes to change the Constitution to lower the age for appointment to the Senate to 18 years to accommodate its 12th senatorial appointee.
    The real problem, if it is one, has arisen because the Democratic Labour Party for the second time, did not win any seats in the Lower House. So that there is no Leader of the Opposition, who must come from the Lower House.
    Since two of the senators, though appointed formally by the President, have to be nominated by the Leader of the Opposition, we are in a real sense driving down into a constitutional cul-de-sac. The question is: How do we escape from this seeming dead end.
    Patterson argues that the Senate is not properly constituted because we do not have all 21 seats in the Senate filled.
    Different process
    Cutting to the chase, Patterson suggests an Irish case as a precedent which he presents as The Irish Solution. That case also arose after a general election, but in Ireland the Senate is partly elected and partly nominated.
    After a two-month delay, ten of the elected senators filed a case asking if they could proceed to begin sittings of the Senate only with the elected senators. The court was asked to rule on whether they, the elected senators, could legally sit and do their business lawfully without the nominated element of 11 senators.
    The court held that they could not. The nominated element was there to ensure that any incoming Prime Minister could nominate his supporters as senators to counterbalance the elected senators.
    But the task of choosing a Prime Minister took a whole two months. Under their proportional representational
    system, one party had 38 seats the other got 35 seats and the third party secured 23 seats.
    We wisely practise first past the post. In any event, before the case was fully heard, the Lower House chose a Prime Minister and that solved the problem. The court, however, gave its decision because of the general importance of the point.
    I do not regard the Irish Solution as an applicable precedent, but since a local case has now been filed I will be restrained in my comments even on the article.
    Key issues
    The local courts may need to look at certain matters. Among these I anticipate will be: 1. The duty of the head of state given the circumstances which have arisen.
    2. Section 34H (I) of the Constitution which protects the President’s actions from being questioned in a court of law may be important. Its impact on the case may be crucial.
    3. If we get past point 2 above, then a related issue will be the interpretation of section 75a of the Constitution and its relationship to the earlier sections of the Constitution such as Sec 35, 26, 50(2) and Sections 61. The provision of Section 75 reads as follows: When there is a vacancy in the office of leader of the Opposition, by reason of the fact that no person is both qualified in accordance with the Constitution and willing to accept appointment to that office, the President shall act in her discretion.
    The question is what does that section cover? Can it cover a situation where there is no Leader of the Opposition, however that vacancy is caused, or does it only cover the situation where a vacancy is caused in a particular situation, that is to say where the specific language of the section covers the situation?
    However we read this situation, the importance of constitutional law and the teaching of civic education looms large in our future.
    The correct approach of everyone in this situation is to comment with due respect for the role of the courts to resolve the issues.
    Ezra Alleyne is an attorney and a former Deputy Speaker of the House of Assembly.

    Source: Nation


  47. Getting our House in order

    By Dr Kristina Hinds

    Following a 30-0 General Election victory by the Barbados Labour Party, Barbadians in some quarters have been mulling over a bit of a puzzle.
    In the absence of a Leader of the Opposition, can the Senate be constituted? Clearly, it can because Parliament was officially opened on February 4, 2022. Whether it has been appropriately constituted, currently short of three senators, is another question, which the courts will now decide.
    The suggestion that because the Senate proceeded with its business, short of two senators in 2018 makes the practice of constituting the Senate short of senators acceptable seems to me a hollow one. Simply having done something in the past does not make it right. Strangely, in 2018 the Prime Minister (PM) thought it wise to have two temporary senators in place to complete the Government’s complement while in 2022 a similar process is supposedly superfluous.
    I will not detail my (non-legal) assessment of this situation here, as it has already been reported in the press. However, I am pleased that this matter about which there is no consensus among even respected legal minds will be decided by the courts. Even if a decision is appealed and eventually taken to the Caribbean Court of Justice, the courts are the appropriate bodies for providing Barbadians with definitive answers to these puzzling questions. After all, interpretation of law is the role of the judiciary in a functioning and healthy democracy.
    What’s the fuss?
    Still, what is all the fuss about this Upper House, the Senate? Does the Senate even hold much sway over our affairs? Both the House of Assembly (comprising 30 elected Members of Parliament) and the Senate (comprising 21 appointed senators) constitute the Parliament of Barbados, our legislature. Jointly, these elected and appointed persons are responsible for enacting the laws of this land, which must then be assented and proclaimed by the President.
    Even though the House of Assembly can overrule the Senate if this Upper Chamber votes a bill down, the ability to delay a bill is an important tool of the Senate. This allows for bills to be adjusted in consideration of the objections expressed by senators and can make for better legislation.
    Therefore, just as the Opposition and even Government backbenchers can offer perspectives on bills during debates in the House of Assembly, the Senate has a role to play. What is more, since the Senate can delay the passage of legislation and often the Opposition in the House of Assembly cannot, this Upper Chamber can provide a handy check in the legislative process.
    In our current situation, in which the country is without an Opposition, the Senate can be vital for scrutinising legislation. Therefore, it really is important to get this House in order . . . right? Yes, it is important. But we may need to keep in mind that what can happen and what should happen are not necessarily the things that will happen.
    Be bold
    Senators would need to be bold; to use critical eyes in evaluating bills; must be willing to genuinely
    weigh the pros and cons of legislation; and would need to truly be drawn from a cross-section of societal interests and backgrounds to meaningfully scrutinise legislation in ways that can benefit society. Despite the meagre pay of less than $20 000 annually, senators have a critical role to play in our legislative process, except that they have no say when it comes to money bills.
    There is so much more one could say about this Upper House, its composition and its utility. Some might assert that this House would benefit from being elected rather than filled with appointed persons. I sit within this camp. Others may think that this House should be altogether demolished. We could instead have a single House that combines both elected members and appointed ones or that is composed in other ways.
    There are examples of such unicameral formulations under the Westminster canopy in Dominica, Guyana and New Zealand. Deciding if we wish to keep two Houses; if we wish to keep them as they are; if we favour minor or major renovations are all matters that require careful thought, significant debate, and reflection on the costs and benefits.
    As we move into the promised phase of constitutional reform as part of the country’s metamorphosis into a republic that is truly of our making, getting this house in order should be on the agenda.
    Outside of the Constitution, we all know that there are ongoing concerns in the country over public finances, public health, education, employment and so many other burning issues large and small that weigh heavily on people daily, so that, beyond the Houses of Parliament, there is truly much ordering of our house to do.
    Dr Kristina Hinds is head of the Department of Government, Sociology, Social Work and Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of the West Indies, Cave Hill.

    Source: Nation


  48. White people make and use rules to block black people.

    Do you remember them saying Obama was not qualified to be President as he was not American.

    The Barbados slave code described black people as ‘an heathenish, brutish and an uncertaine, dangerous kinde of people’.
    The Barbados slave code ostensibly sought to protect slaves from cruel masters, in practice, it provided extensive protections for masters, but not for slaves.

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

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

Continue reading