Dear Editor,
Please allow me some space to share my opinion on what transpired yesterday in parliament with the eviction of Mr. Jamaul Pringle, the leader of the Opposition.
Listening to the case and doing my own research, I have to conclude that I am in agreement with what the president did was done on the premise of the standing order / constitution by which she is guided by.
However, below is an extract I got online which peeked my interest.
” Generally, the oath of allegiance does not necessarily have to be taken during a formal sitting of Parliament, unless the Standing Orders or parliamentary practice specifically require it.
Under the Constitution of Antigua and Barbuda, the requirement is that the member must “make and subscribe” the oath before taking part in proceedings. The Constitution itself does not expressly say the oath must occur publicly in the chamber or during a sitting.
In many Westminster-style systems, including Caribbean parliaments, the oath may be administered:
- at the first sitting of Parliament;
- in the office of the Speaker or President;
- before the Clerk of Parliament;
- or at another authorized setting arranged by the presiding officer,
especially where urgency, illness, absence from a sitting, or procedural necessity exists.
What matters legally is usually:
- the oath is administered by a person authorized to do so;
- it follows the constitutional form;
- it is properly recorded; and
- it occurs before the member participates.
So, if the Speaker (for the House) or President of the Senate arranged a private or administrative setting for the oath to be taken and recorded properly, that would likely satisfy the constitutional requirement, unless a specific Standing Order says otherwise.
Why then couldn’t the speaker/ president arrange a private setting prior to the Governor General’s presentation and have the swearing in of Mr. Pringle done?
Mr. Pringle’s absence was not one of any frivolous nature but one that required the moral, emotional, & paternal support towards his sick daughter.
Alex
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
Did she not say that she raised it privately and he chose to go into parliament and raise a fuss? Why else would they raise it privately with him?
The more important question is why everytime Pringle make news from his presence in parliament is because he making a damn fool of himself? Which other Opposition Leader in the entire Caribbean behave so inept? Dat UPP fu study. If they know what good fu dem, they better hurry find a new, sensible leader!
Let me be the first to comment here
Disclaimer:
I’m not legally trained but I have done some training the Parliamentary procedures in the early eighties as a part of our youth exercise.
Convention dictates they all oath of allegiance must be done publicly in the chamber of parliament for all to see.
We don’t administer oaths privately.
The good member was off island tending to the affairs of his child and returned over the weekend or thereabouts. Monday was a public holiday as Whit Monday.
It’s standard procedure for every member of the House and the Senate to be issued a summons, which in Parliamentary language is simply an invitation. It is not equivalent to a court summons.
You as an elected member or senator can attend or be absent with an excuse sent to the clerk of parliament.
With all that being said, how do you know that they expected him to attend?
At what time would this ceremony be done?
The Speaker has no jurisdiction over the parliament during the sitting of the Throne Speech.
The Governor General is only allowed to address the joint session with the Upper House being the presiding body.
In fact, the good gentleman in his letter of excuse for his absence, has clearly stated that he’s willing to wait until an “ordinary”sitting of parliament to take the oath of allegiance.
This is a “special” joint sitting dedicated to the delivery of the Throne Speech.
Housekeeping business must be conducted during ordinary sittings. Swearing in is considered housekeeping business.
In summary, the President, after learning they he was seated in the chamber, invited him to her private chambers along with the Speaker who would be his presiding officer.
She explained the provisions to him using Erskine May and the Constitution, fully informing that he was not to sit in the chamber until after his swearing-in. This means they be could have sat in the gallery with the VIPs, such as the Police Commissioner, the Ambassadors, etc.
He chose instead to defy her charge by challenging her to address the matter from the bench so that the audience can witness her admonishment to him publicly.
This is clear that he did so the dramatization of the issue.
Last time that I checked the Senate President approached him privately and the leader of the opposition -out of his own admissive voice said he wanted to make an example and show the ppl of Antigua Barbuda how it is done… He wanted it to be done publicly in the parliament. He’s not entitled to anything. He made the fuss.
I am sure that Pringle was invited to the joint session as leader of the opposition party and not to sit on the floor. Either through a misunderstanding or a deliberate act, he chose to sit on the floor knowing fully well that he could not sit there.
The good lady was correct in asking him to leave, and the fact that he complied quietly indicated to me that he knew he was in the wrong. All he had to do was to man up and admit it, but yet he still went on the radio and along with his senators, proceeded to make bigger fools of themselves.
They are really not off to a good start to be honest and the million dollar question is…
When will Pringle make himself available to take the oath?
These INCOMPETENT, IGNORANT, INEPT, ANGRY, IMMATURE “tactics” will not work!!! If he was hoping to evoke sympathy from the public, it BACKFIRED!!! Stop the DUNCENESS and be a man about the people’s business.
Let me tell you Pringle is a sample boii. He better quit while he’s ahead. ALWAYS a try some stunt! Cha.
No one here addressed the question of why Hon Pringle could not be accommodated. There is an old local saying: Antiguans love ugly but not advantage. It’s seems like nowadays we love both.