File: Herbert Volney ... from judge to MP and will be citizen Volney in Sept. 23 |
He had been given 14 days from the date the Speaker of the House of Representatives declared the seat vacant to decide if he would go to court.
In a statement Wednesday Mark Dolsingh, manager of the St Joseph constituency office of the MP stated that Volney would vacate the seat on September 23. "The Member of Parliament for the constituency of St Joseph does not propose to oblige litigation in the High Court for several reasons including the high cost of litigation...and the absence of access to the appellate jurisdiction of the Privy Council or the Caribbean Court of Justice," Dolsing stated.
He added that Volney expresses his "profound gratitude to the constituents of st Joseph for their support and joins prayerfully for the election of a successor. The seat...will accordingly be vacated on September 23, 2013 - a day of infamy for the democratic way of life of the people of Trinidad and Tobago.
In explaning why Volney chose this route and decided not to contest the byelection that must now be held before Christmas, Dolsingh outlined five reasons why the MP disagreed with the speaker.
One of his principal reasons for disagreement is his contention that there was no proper Stanbding Order to act under Section 49 that would allow the Speaker to "identify and recognise the leader of the Party in the House". He noted that the Speaker "arrogated unto himself the power of a judge of the High Court". In addition he said the speaker did not recognise the "Supremacy of the constitution" and in doing so violated section 52 of the constitution.
In a statement Wednesday Mark Dolsingh, manager of the St Joseph constituency office of the MP stated that Volney would vacate the seat on September 23. "The Member of Parliament for the constituency of St Joseph does not propose to oblige litigation in the High Court for several reasons including the high cost of litigation...and the absence of access to the appellate jurisdiction of the Privy Council or the Caribbean Court of Justice," Dolsing stated.
He added that Volney expresses his "profound gratitude to the constituents of st Joseph for their support and joins prayerfully for the election of a successor. The seat...will accordingly be vacated on September 23, 2013 - a day of infamy for the democratic way of life of the people of Trinidad and Tobago.
In explaning why Volney chose this route and decided not to contest the byelection that must now be held before Christmas, Dolsingh outlined five reasons why the MP disagreed with the speaker.
One of his principal reasons for disagreement is his contention that there was no proper Stanbding Order to act under Section 49 that would allow the Speaker to "identify and recognise the leader of the Party in the House". He noted that the Speaker "arrogated unto himself the power of a judge of the High Court". In addition he said the speaker did not recognise the "Supremacy of the constitution" and in doing so violated section 52 of the constitution.
Dolsing's statement noted that Volney has recieved the advice of Senior Counsel who are on the opinion that "there is strong justificble cause against the Speaker...to challenge and upset his ruling."
Notwithstanding that, the statement made it clear that Volney is not proceeding with a court challenge.
Dolsing wrote: "The cause to correct a patently wrong ruling...is not, however, for the Member of Parliament to pursue, given his desire not to continue in electoral politcs. This is a cause for civil society and the law bodies to take up."
In his ruling on September 9, Speaker Wade Mark said he acted in accordance of section 49 of the constitution, which provides for the seat of a member of the House to be declared vacant when that member ceases to belong to the party on whose ticket the MP won the election.
In Volney's case, Mark has received a letter from Volney stating that he had resigned from the United National Congress, the party under whose banner he won the election in 2010.
In addition the Speaker stated that he acted in according with Standing Orders 92(1) and (2), which state:
In addition the Speaker stated that he acted in according with Standing Orders 92(1) and (2), which state:
"The Speaker shall have power to regulate the conduct of business in all matters not provided for in these Standing Orders.
"The decision in all cases for which these Standing Orders do not provide, shall lie within the discretion of the Speaker, and shall not be open to challenge."
6 comments:
Post a Comment