BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATIVE for St. Christopher Seven – the Hon. Dr. Timothy S. Harris – is standing firm behind the decision of Six Elected Parliamentarians to seek redress from the Court regarding the delayed tabling of the Motion of No Confidence.
Hons. Mark Brantley, Vance Amory, Eugene Hamilton and Shawn Richards of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, along with Government Backbenchers Harris and Hon. Sam Condor, initiated Court action in early April 2013 claiming that their implied right to have the MONC tabled and debated in the Federal Parliament has been subverted.
During an appearance on Sugar City FM on Thursday (May 30), Dr. Harris responded to a question submitted by email explaining that after waiting in vain for in excess of 130 days for the MONC to be tabled in Parliament, they took the appropriate action.
“It was the right thing to do in taking the matter to the Court because what other mechanisms did we (have) in the context of rules of law and order in the contest of our Constitution? When there is an infringement to our Constitutional right and that infringement is not addressed, we resort to the Court. And so we did what law-abiding citizens ought to have done.
“Injustice was and is continuing to be done towards the Members of Parliament. We did the right thing. The Chamber of Industry and Commerce said we did the right thing. The Hotel and Tourism Association – in asking the Prime Minister to have the matter debated – said in other words that we had done the right thing. We were within out rights…”
Dr. Harris suggested that in the context of the fact that the MONC did not at that point reached the Parliament for debate, Prime Minister the Rt. Hon. Dr. Denzil L. Douglas “is acting as a rogue in the context of the traditions of democracy which are sacred to us. We say (to the Court) could you tell him what he is doing is wrong and that our rights should not be violated and the Motion ought to be heard”?
The Government Backbencher suggested that Dr. Douglas should “do the descent and honourable thing, but if decency is no longer a word and a concept and a principle to which the Prime Minister adheres to, then we have to ensure that we remove the Prime Minister and that persons who are committed to decency to an adherence to our democratic traditions of life, that those persons are the ones in whom we repose the confidence. The law is on our side…”
