.png)
D4 Saga: Speaker’s Attorney hits back at AG in Court
In the Saturday April 13, 2019, hearing of the case, the AG said there was no need for the court to descend into the political arena and pointed out that the Leader of the Opposition, Marlon A. Penn (R8) tried to raise the matter in the House, but was denied because he had breached the Standing Orders by not giving the required 7 days prior notice.
Vanterpool Elected on Elections Night - Mr Ramlogan
According to arguments raised by Mr Ramlogan—head of the legal team representing the Speaker—a Member of the House (MH) is elected when the Supervisor of Elections certifies who the successful candidate is with the majority of votes.
This is done by the “return” which announces the winner as an elected MH can, in fact, resign before a Speaker is appointed and before he takes the oath as this simply entitles him to participate in the proceedings of the House but does not confer the status of an elected member, the argument states.
With that, Mr Ramlogan asked the court to reject the position taken by Mr Vanterpool which was supported by the AG, to the contrary that the status of an elected MH arises only after a Speaker has been elected and the oath has been administered.
According to him, this was illogical and misconceived because it meant an MH who was disqualified from serving as an MH immediately after the General Election, would be unable to resign or vacate their seat.
Ramlogan’s Hypothesis
Mr Ramlogan gave some powerful and thought-provoking examples that produced much laughter in court. He asked what would happen if the day after the election, the successful candidate was declared insane.
“Would the people have to be represented by a madman until the Speaker was elected to administer the oath?” he questioned.
He gave further examples of the successful candidate being declared bankrupt or convicted for a criminal offence and wanting to resign, querying whether they would be unable to vacate their seat until the Speaker was appointed.
The court was told that the fundamental flaw in the arguments from Mr Vanterpool’s Attorneys and the AG lies in the assumption that a Speaker would soon be elected after the elections.
There were numerous examples in political history where this did not happen for prolonged periods which would mean that the disqualified MH would be able to remain in office and draw a salary until the Speaker was elected, he said.
Mr Ramlogan further cited a Trinidad example where there was a tie after the 2001 General Election and a Speaker could not be elected for some nine months.
There were examples of hung Parliaments where the political configuration was such that they could not agree on a Speaker and Parliament was unable to convene for an MH to take their oath for a very long time.
In such a situation, an MH would not be unable to tender his resignation the argument continues. The people would be forced to have an MH who does not wish to represent them and who must be paid his salary until the Speaker is elected and the oath administered the Lead Attorney implored
AG Rebuked
Mr Ramlogan took the AG to task because for his submission that Mr Vanterpool’s resignation was a matter for the House.
He further noted that Mr Vanterpool’s Attorneys adopted the AG’s submission in total and were hence equally saying that this matter could be dealt with by the House.
Why did the AG not himself raise the matter in the House since he was a member with special privileges, he questioned.
The Judge was invited to dismiss the claim and remit the matter to the House in light of the AG’s position which was supported by Mr Vanterpool.
.png)
Follow Us On
21 Responses to “D4 Saga: Speaker’s Attorney hits back at AG in Court”
The AG had he secret meetings with the NDP the day after Mark resign. So he need to go siddown Andrew needs to get a new AG. This one is a damn c***.
The AG compromised himself and puts his unbiased judgement into question.. Mark will lose this case.
BTW; how come the AG giving evidence for Mark? Does he not work for the government? I would think the AG should be neutral but it look like the AG is NDP. What a mess! We need a new AG.
The speaker came to office, was given the letter from the Clerk and the rest is history BAM
Easy case for any Judge even if its appeal