It would be foolhardy for the President to announce a date for elections without the agreement of the Opposition Leader

Dear Editor,

“What is strange is the suggestion by Kirton that it is some unnamed ‘our leaders’ and not specifically Granger, who are bringing the country into global disrepute. Kirton knows as well as anyone else that it is Granger and no one else who has the power to name a date for elections. But Kirton then shields Granger from the consequence of his failure to name a date by his (Kirton’s) attempt to rewrite Article 106 (7) of the Constitution.”

This quote, Editor, is from a letter by Mr Christopher Ram published in Saturday’s edition of your newspaper.

In my letter to which Ram has responded, I clearly stated: “Based on Mr Lowenfield’s reported pronouncement I want to recommend that the President and Opposition Leader meet again prior to March 21 and agree on a date for elections.”

It certainly cannot be lost on Ram that there is a constitutional requirement resulting from the passage of the no-confidence vote that elections be held within 90 days failing which, and barring a stay or overturn of the Chief Justice’s ruling, the life of the government can only be extended by a two-thirds majority of the National Assembly which necessitates the support of the opposition.

So it is quite clear at this time that both the President and the Opposition Leader have a responsibility to ensure that our country is not brought into global disrepute. In my view, the President would be foolhardy to announce a date without the agreement of the Opposition Leader whose parliamentary support is needed to extend the life of the government beyond March 21 and to now facilitate elections occasioned by the passage of the NCV.

In a later paragraph of my letter I made it clear, “It is the President, not GECOM that sets an election date but it is GECOM and not the President that must ensure that everything is in place for a credible election.”

Editor, I have sought to quote parts of my letter which I think represent a pertinent response to Mr Ram’s accusations levelled at me including that I am attempting to rewrite the Constitution. I disagree with Ram but respect his right to his views and to any conclusions at which your readership may arrive.

Yours faithfully,

Wesley Kirton