ALP Legal Counsel Speaks Out

Details

Politics

Thursday, 14 June 2012 13:52

By Everton Barnes

Antigua St John's - Senior legal Counsel to the opposition Antigua Labour Party and close adviser to the party, Anthony Astaphan, is advising the party to discontinue its efforts at damage control in the aftermath of the No-Confidence motion debacle in parliament two weeks ago.

In an internal party memo sent to all of the party’s parliamentarians and executive members, Astaphan said the attempts at ‘spin’ by the party’s Political Leader Lester Bird have harmed the organization, rather than helped. He is also advising the party leadership to fully disclose all the issues associated with the matter.

Astaphan is of the view that statements by Attorney General Justin Simon have contradicted Bird’s several statements on the affair. He said the matter raises a number of questions, including one asking whether or not all the elected parliamentarians were kept in the loop on the decision-making concerning the aborted motion.
 

“The facts must be confronted with full disclosure by the Leadership, and an honest and frank debate about the Executive and Elected Members...The sooner this unfortunate episode is given a Christian funeral and buried the better,” the Senior Counsel stated. The full text of Astaphan’s memo is attached.

COMMENTS BY SENIOR COUNSEL ANTHONY ASTAPHAN
 
I trust the Honourable Leader of the Opposition is well.

This issue has caused considerable damage to the leadership of the ALP and spin such as this will not help. The facts must be confronted with full disclosure by the Leadership, and an honest and frank debate about the Executive and Elected Members.  Indeed there are elected Members of the ALP who had no clue until Gaston spoke to the House. The sooner this unfortunate episode is given a Christian funeral and buried the better.

However, Mr. Simon's statements were clear.  The point is that Simon has publicly stated that there were discussions in the morning or at least with the Speaker, and that he said to the Hon Member of the ALP that the Leader of the Opposition would have one way or the other to inform the Speaker in writing.

So the critical questions which are provoked by the AG's statements are:

When was the decision to postpone made?

What was the reason for the postponement?

If the rules permit postponement why was no written request made?

Was the Speaker or AG ever informed of the possible illness as a reason for the postponement or withdrawal prior to the lunch break?

Were all of the elected Members of the ALP kept in the loop, and

As an outright victory was unlikely, why were the People of Antigua denied the right of audience to the possible debate?

I trust that the ALP will find the appropriative answers - otherwise they may as well cut this loose.

Friday June 8 2012
 
Earlier on the same day of Senior Counsel Astaphan’s emailed remarks, the Leader of the Opposition had released the statement below.
 
MEDIA STATEMENT

The Antigua and Barbuda Labour Party (ALP) rejects as propaganda the recent statements by Attorney General Justin Simon regarding consultations between St. Peter’s Representative, Hon. Asot Michael, and him during the afternoon of Wednesday, May 28, 2012 the day parliament held its last sitting.

For the day in question, the Speaker of the House placed the Motion of No-Confidence last on the agenda or Order Paper for discussion. The parliamentary session that began at 10:15 am that morning, lasted for five hours, or until 3:15 pm in the late afternoon. After the lunch break, other items remained on the agenda or Order Paper to be discussed before the Motion of No-Confidence could be raised.
          
The consultations on the last agenda item, between Hon. Asot Michael and the Attorney General, strayed from the issue of the possible postponement of the Motion of No-Confidence, to the issue of withdrawal of the Motion. Only the issue of the Motion’s postponement was to have been broached. It was the Attorney General who moved the discussion to the issue of withdrawal of the Motion, the ALP has been reliably informed.
 

A Nation Grappling with Litigation When Sir Novelle Hamilton Richards, Statesman, Diplomat and author wrote the National Anthem [1967], through patriotism, foresight and words of wisdom... read more

        
When, therefore, the Attorney General remarked that he held discussions about the withdrawal of the Motion of No-Confidence, it was because he strayed from the single issue of the Motion’s possible postponement. Hon. Lester Bird remained committed to presenting the Motion on the afternoon of Wednesday, May 30, 2012, if there would be no agreement on its postponement.
          
Had the Hon. Lester Bird not felt unwell after the lunch break, then the ALP is certain that the Rural East Representative would have returned to Parliament and presented the Motion of No-Confidence. The Motion’s withdrawal was not contemplated on that day by the Leader of the Opposition.
          
Despite the conclusive end of the sitting, without the Motion of No-Confidence being presented, the Hon. Lester Bird, Leader of the Opposition, has made it clear that he will write to the Speaker requesting a new date and a specific commencement time for the Motion of No-Confidence to be discussed and subsequently voted on by the members of Parliament.
          
The ALP assures the nation that the Motion of No-Confidence in Prime Minister Spencer is a worthy effort to remove from office the elected official who is responsible for the parlous state of the economy; who has failed to bring to Parliament, as required by law, more than 50 loan agreements totaling more than $1.5 billion dollars; who has arranged for old engines to be bought for an inflated sum of US$47 million dollars; and who has otherwise made life in Antigua and Barbuda miserable for the vast majority of its people. The ALP will keep the nation informed.

• < Prev
• Next >