…about AG Williams move
Once again, the actions of Attorney General Williams have raised the question as to how in heaven’s name he was made a “Senior Counsel”. This is just the sort of thing that dilutes the conference of honours and such like by the State…on par with Hamilton Green being given an OR! Anyhow, the AG, who’d ordered his staff not to attend the Bar and Bench’s Oil and Gas seminar because they were prepping so hard, delivered several shockers to the CCJ.
He first contended that “the doctrine of “basic Structure” does not apply to Guyana and any other Caricom country that has a Constitution that mirrors the Westminster model”!!! Is this guy for real?? Since you mightn’t believe your (humble) Eyewitness, let the UK Constitutional Law Association speak:
The Basic Structure Doctrine “has been invoked in two cases (Bowen vs Attorney General BZ 2009 SC 2, and British Caribbean Bank Ltd vs AG Belize Claim No. 597 of 2011) by the Supreme Court of Belize to strike down amendments to the Constitution of Belize. In both cases, the legislation amending the Constitution had secured the special majority in the House of Representatives required by the Constitution, but was nevertheless struck down by the Supreme Court on the grounds that the legislation violated the basic structure of the Belize Constitution.”
Belize is still a Caricom member, isn’t it? Williams kept insisting our legislature followed the procedure laid out by our Constitution for amending itself and therefore could not be unlawful!! Let the real Senior Counsels of the UK enlighten him further about the interpretation of Belize Chief Justice’s take on their analogous Constitution’s amendment clause – s69:
“s69 was a mere ‘manner and form’ requirement, no more than a ‘procedural handbook’, and was certainly not determinative of the constitutionality of legislation enacted by Parliament. Quite apart from the formal procedures laid down by s69, any prospective amendment of the Constitution had to conform to the Constitution’s normative requirements as captured by section 68, which provides that all laws enacted by Parliament must be ‘subject to the Constitution’. Any other view would entail subordinating the supremacy of the Constitution in favour of parliamentary supremacy, for once the required majority for an amendment is obtained then absolutely no constitutional provision would be beyond alteration or revocation.”
The second foot Williams put into his mouth was introducing an argument that hadn’t been raised in the lowers courts. The law doesn’t permit you to do this!! It’s like arguing the case de novo.
But it doesn’t matter anyway. That the PPP and PNC AGREED to the changes doesn’t make it legal. Isn’t this what President Granger told Nagamootoo about the agreement by the PNC and AFC to have him chair the Cabinet??!!
…on catfish
Your Eyewitness is still thinking about this catfish business – which appears quite fishy to him. Firstly, he accepts the US is being protectionist in banning the fishes just to please the southern cat-fisher lobby. But he’s doubly hurt at this unilateral and unfair action to our exporters when he found out the move was made during the Obama Administration!! There were never enough catfishers to turn those red Republican states Democratic Blue!! So, was it all for the campaign funds?? Say it ain’t so!!
But what’s the excuse of this Government for not moving faster to comply with the US’ sanitary laws since the so called “violations” were highlighted since 2015??? Not enough catfishers and catfish exporters here to swing the vote? Or stuff the campaign chest of FUCOP? Be as it may, we’re now forced to make amendments when the fish has already slipped the net!!
Let’s eat as much gillbacka as we can while we can!!
…about the GuySuCo Board
Could someone explain what criteria were used to select the members of the new GuySuCo Board?? Don’t we have enough theoreticians in the SPU that’s supposed to be running (down?) the show??
