BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – THE application filed by the former Speaker of the National Assembly, the Hon. Curtis Martin, to have the Motion of No Confidence (MoNC) case dismissed was denied this afternoon (Jan. 20) by Her Ladyship Justice Marlene Carter.
Her Ladyship heard arguments in the matter only yesterday from the Speaker’s counsel and those of former Leader of the Opposition the Hon. Mark Brantley et al.
The former argued that there was no reason to continue with the case because the purpose for which the MoNC was filed, which is to bring forth the dissolution of Parliament, has already been achieved.
It was further forwarded that to advance with the case at this point would equate to engaging in nothing more than an “academic” exercise and that the issues are no longer “live”.
The other side argued that while there are some aspects of the case which are moot, given the dissolution of Parliament, there are others which the Court still needs to pronounce on especially that of whether or not the Opposition’s rights to have the MoNC tabled and debated was breached by it not being tabled.
Her Ladyship ruled in favour of Brantley et al and indicated that there are still some live issues in the case that need to be determined by the Court.
A hearing date however has yet to be set after the schedules of the Court and counsel for the parties involved have been reviewed.
Following Justice Carter’s ruling, Anthony Astaphan QC, counsel for the former Speaker, told the media that the arguments forwarded by both sides were sound and noted that he respected the decision of the Court.
“The argument they made was a good one, the argument we made was a good one. A judge in exercising justice has to decide which one she things is fairer or more just. She’s decided that the matter is no longer urgent, the House has been dissolved, and then the matter would have to be set down at a date sometime in the future to be heard…Based on the schedules of the lawyers, it is very unlikely going to be before the election…”
Vincent Byron, one of the representatives of Brantley et al, also spoke with the media, indicating that the judgment provides an opportunity for Opposition to present its case on what it feels to be the infringement of its constitutional rights.
“…The judge has clearly determined that she will move forward and hear the matter. The judgment…, from my point of view, is that the defendants were trying their best, their very best to thwart any attempt to have this case heard and the judge has stood firm and been very firm. And so there are live issues to be heard that she will hear.
“The rights of the elected majority in the National Assembly have been violated. That’s our case and she will hear that. She said it is a live issue; that this is still to be determined. The rights under our Constitution must be upheld for the good of our democracy.”
