Dear Editor,
Article 170(2) of the Constitution states “When a Bill is presented to the President for assent, he shall signify that he assents or that he withholds assent.” Article 170(3) states “Where the President withholds his assent to a Bill, he shall return it to the Speaker within twenty-one days of the date when it was presented to him for assent with a message stating the reasons why he has withheld his assent.” This article is clear. The President is constitutionally bound to either assent or not assent within 21 days. This shameful exercise of sitting on a bill before him without communicating his assent or non-assent is an assault on the constitution by the President. It undermines the efficacy of the Constitution and the democratic underpinnings of this provision. It is tantamount to practising dictatorship by delay. I am fed up admonishing APNU to stop complaining ad nauseam about these travesties practised by the PPP and drive home some legal force around them. Go to the courts and get these issues clarified.
No court in its right mind would facilitate this abuse of the Constitution and this blatant stymieing of the law-making process of the state. If this state of affairs is to continue, it would mean that laws passed by the people’s representatives in Parliament will be blockaded by a President who does nothing. Article 170 was actually amended by the PPP in 2000 to ensure the President makes a decision within 21 days to move the law-making process along to the benefit of the nation. Now, the PPP is dishonouring and backtracking on its own amendment. This fiasco is obviously a violation of the Constitution. Article 94 states “The President may be removed from office if he commits any violation of this Constitution or any gross misconduct.”
Yours faithfully,
M. Maxwell
