Ordinarily, I wouldn't comment on anything the Congress of the People (COP) says. The party seems not to understand it is the government and, given the length of time that's passed since May 2010, I doubt it ever will.
However, the stance lately taken by its National Council and articulated by its Political Leader has me very astounded.
However, the stance lately taken by its National Council and articulated by its Political Leader has me very astounded.
The media's reporting COP passed a unanimous resolution demanding Security Minister apologize for certain statements he made during a recent Parliament meeting. (I have no court clothes nor money, so, out of an abundance of caution, I won't repeat what the Minister actually said.)
Rightly so, our constitution guarantees elected MPs and Senators full immunity from civil or criminal proceedings for whatever they may say during the course of their contributions to parliamentary debates. Without such protection and assurance, our parliamentarians would be wimps, afraid to call a spade a spade.
Several COP MPs were on spot in Parliament when whatever Minister Warner said was said. Not one there and then objected.
Rightly so, our constitution guarantees elected MPs and Senators full immunity from civil or criminal proceedings for whatever they may say during the course of their contributions to parliamentary debates. Without such protection and assurance, our parliamentarians would be wimps, afraid to call a spade a spade.
Several COP MPs were on spot in Parliament when whatever Minister Warner said was said. Not one there and then objected.
How could they ups and protest after 48 hours elapsed? Were they asleep? Or, were they outgunned by De Lima's forces at their Council meeting? Then again, is it that they aren't that wise when it comes to constitutional law? I also note that, as a lawyer in private practice, Mr De Lima has defended notorious drug dealers who would have paid him whatever fees he charged. The COP seems quite comfortable with such things.
Minister Ramadhar is the chairman of the committee appointed by government to come up with a new constitution. I'm wondering if he's jumping the gun since, under the existing constitution, his party's resolution (as reported) is purposeless, baseless, futile, without merit and inviting of the harshest scorn. I'm also wondering whether a constitutional lawyer would have been the better choice for such an important exercise.
Minister Ramadhar is the chairman of the committee appointed by government to come up with a new constitution. I'm wondering if he's jumping the gun since, under the existing constitution, his party's resolution (as reported) is purposeless, baseless, futile, without merit and inviting of the harshest scorn. I'm also wondering whether a constitutional lawyer would have been the better choice for such an important exercise.
Lyndon Gibbs-Guillard | Irving Street, San Fernando.
No comments:
Post a Comment