BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – THE Basseterre High Court of Justice is in the process of considering arguments proposed by counsel in the Motion of No Confidence (MONC) case as to whether or not the Speaker of the National Assembly should be opened to cross-examination and whether documents and emails passed amongst himself and Members of Cabinet should be disclosed to the Court.
The arguments were forwarded on Friday (Dec. 19) during a case management hearing presided over by resident judge Her Ladyship Justice Marlene Carter.
Counsel for the Hon. Mark Brantley et al filed an application with the Court for cross-examination of the Speaker and for disclosure of certain documents or correspondence.
The application was objected to by Sylvester Anthony, counsel for the Speaker of the House the Hon. Curtis Martin.
One of Brantley’s attorneys, Douglas Mendes SC, forwarded that it is necessary to know what was happening during the period that the Motion of No Confidence was filed and the ensuing months which caused the Speaker not to table it in Parliament.
He said something is amiss and expressed the belief that the Court would benefit from such information.
He also indicated that the documents/emails/correspondence are specific to those passed amongst himself and the Members of Cabinet, particularly Prime Minister the Rt. Hon. Dr. Denzil L. Douglas.
In response, Anthony explained that the Speaker did explain his reasons for not tabling the Motion of No Confidence and added that in the claimants’ pleadings, they did not make any issue of the Speaker’s explanation and he should not be cross-examined.
He added that the claimants have not adduced any evidence and have not claimed any act of badfaith or collusion against the Speaker, or has it been shown that the Speaker received or sent any correspondence from or to Cabinet Members.
Anthony described the claimants’ request as “a fishing exercise”.
Mendes’ response was that the claimants are simply requesting that the Speaker honour the rules and his duty of disclosure and hand over any correspondence amongst himself and Cabinet Members. If there is none, he suggested, simply indicate that there is none.
The Court questioned the relevance of who may or may not have compelled the Speaker to come to the decision of not tabling the MONC, especially because the issue before the Court is whether or not the Opposition Members’ constitutional rights were breached by its non-tabling.
Mendes told the Court that should these documents be disclosed, then a decision on whether or not cross-examination of the Speaker could be made.
Her Ladyship reserved her decision on this matter until today (Dec. 22).
The full case of whether or not the Opposition Members’ constitutional rights were infringed by the non-tabling of the MONC is slated for hearing 0n January 19-20, 2015.
