Questionable Conduct: The Jamaican Political Reality

                                The response of the Senate—the Upper House—to the Declaratory Order by the Constitutional Court in  Arthur Williams v Andrew Holness  [ Claim No. 2012 HCV 06428] is nothing but sheer stupidity . The gist of the findings were a) that the pre-signed undated letters were null and void—ie of no legal effect; b) the Leader of the Opposition has no role whatsoever in the resignation or removal of a Senator; c) Arthur Williams and Christopher Tufton did not resign. The implications are crystal clear: i) Williams and Tufton are still members of the Senate; ii) Nigel Clarke and Ruel Reid were never duly appointed as there was no vacancy. It is not a complicated matter, even though the JLP could have done with a few more Senators. That too would have been inconsistent with the constitution, contrary to public policy, unlawful and, accordingly, null and v...

The  Constitution recognises only one member  of those not supporting the Government. That individual is designated as  "Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition". As such he/she is a creature of the Constitution of Jamaica and is sworn to uphold that fundamental document in pursuit of certain specified functions . The Supreme Court of Jamaica has found in a unanimous declaratory order that Andrew Holness has acted  a) inconsistent with the Constitution,  b) contrary to public policy, and  c) unlawfully.  That would not be of national importance if Andrew Holness was an ordinary member of the public, even a John Doe. It would only attract the  cursory  interest if he was only an Opposition Member of Parliament. But Andrew Holness is the Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition . Interesting Questions: Can he maintain that lofty and constitutionally important position if those findings are allowed to stand?  Are ...