BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – FOLLOWING scrutiny of Justice John Benjamin’s judgement in the recent constitutional matter surrounding Jason Hamilton’s appointment to the position of Attorney General (AG), one of the counsel for the claimants, Constance Mitcham, has concluded that the Senators (Increasing of Number) 2012 Bill that Hamilton assisted in passing was declared invalid.
After handing down his judgment yesterday (Feb. 28), counsel for both the claimants and the defendants were not necessarily clear if the Bill was struck down or remained law.
Mitcham – who spoke with the media just moments after the ruling – explained that while she had to read the judgment in its entirety to get a better understanding of His Lordship’s decision, it stands to reason that if the Court nullified the appointment of Hamilton as a Senator and as AG, whatever he may have done in the House in that capacity is also null and void.
She – while appearing on WINNFM 98.9’s Voices - explained that while His Lordship did not speak specifically to the Bill in the conclusion of his judgment (the portion which was read in court), it is clearly stated in its body. Mitcham – in this regard - made reference to sections 26, 27 and 37 of His Lordship’s decision which read:
[26] A clear example of the Claimants' claim was the effect of the votes of the 4th Defendant. It was the vote of Mr. Hamilton that tipped the balancing scale that caused the Senators (Increase in Number) Act to be passed by a slender majority of 8 to 7.
[27] The Claimants contend that his presence in the Senate was unlawful and it flows that the Attorney General's vote ought not to have been counted and the Bill would not have been passed. The Court would refer to this matter later in the judgment.
[37] And finally with respect to Section 44(2) of the Constitution and its applicability to the proceedings of the Assembly, the Court adopts the submissions of Senior Counsel for the Claimants as the most reasonable interpretation presented to the Court.
“So it is clear from the judgment that the Bill is gone”, Mitcham concluded.
A member of the respondents legal team – Sylvester Anthony – appeared on Freedom FM’s ‘Issues’ and painted quite a different picture from that of Mitcham’s.
He said – according to his understanding – the court made three declarations which speak to the nullification of the appointment of Hamilton as a Senator and as Attorney General. He contended that the court made no order relative to the Bill.
“So the only conclusion that can be drawn from this is that there was no declaration made by the Court with regard to the Senators Increasing in Numbers Bill…None of the orders that were made by the judge in the decision reflect that.”
Later last evening, Prime Minister the Rt. Hon. Dr. Denzil L. Douglas – in a national address – expressed that the government was awaiting advice from its legal team on whether or not the Senators (Increase of Number) Act 2013 is null and void.
