Kamla: Parliament can't deny people's right to vote

OPPOSITION Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar renewed the UNC's call for the Prime Minister to immediately call local government elections in TT.

She also accused Government of trying to deprive people of their right to vote..

Persad-Bissessar made these comments after Thursday's Privy Council decision against the Government's extension of the term of incumbent local government representatives by a year without going to the electorate.

In a statement, Persad-Bissessar, said, "We want the population to remember the effect of this judgment. We want the people to understand that the Parliament cannot take away their right to vote and to participate in our democracy."

She claimed this was what the Government was attempting to do by extending the life of local government corporations.

"This latest judgment is a vindication of the right of the people to choose their representatives, and also to choose to vote them out, if they offer themselves for re-election."

She said the UNC now "calls on the Prime Minister, on behalf of the electorate, to immediately fix the date for local government elections and to ensure that such elections are held lawfully and freely."

Persad-Bissesar questioned what the judgement means for the legality of decisions taken by local government corporations and whether local government practitioners would have been paid their salaries.

She acknowledged UNC activist Ravi Balgobin-Maharaj's efforts to challenge the extension in the local courts and all the way to the Privy Council.

Balgobin-Maharaj, in a statement, said, "I was disappointed that I lost this matter in the High Court and Court of Appeal but am happy that the Privy Council has given judgment in my favour."

In a statement, UNC PRO Kirk Meighoo said the Privy Council did not order Government to call elections immediately because it respected the separation of powers between the Judiciary and the Executive.

While Attorney General Reginald Armour SC indicated this at a news conference in Port of Spain about the judgement, Meighoo claimed that Armour's statements were designed to stall for time because the PNM is afraid of losing the elections.

The UNC collectively described the judgement as a victory that was inspired by Persad-Bissessar's efforts tp protect democracy in TT.

Princes Town MP Barry Padarath credited Persad-Bissessar for the Privy Council's ruling.

He described the ruling as a "fatal blow to the PNM in their thirst to subvert and compromise our democracy for political expediency."

Caroni East MP Dr Rishard Seecharan said, "The verdict is a result of Mrs Persad-Bissessar's decisive and visionary initiative in legally challenging the PNM's entrenched autocratic rule."

Couva North MP Ravi Ratiram said, Persad-Bissessar's "determination and dedication to uphold the principles of democracy has played a major part in this victory."

Pointe-a-Pierre MP David Lee said Persad-Bissessar was right to stand her ground on this matter

The UNC's Oropouche East constituency executive also praised Persad-Bissessar for the judgement.

In a statement, its chairman Raymond Surujbally said, 'We are ready to with our candidates and secure victory at the polls."

The UNC's Couva South executive claimed the judgement showed the PNM was prepared to murder democracy to ensure its own survival.

The UNC Youth Arm, in a statement, said the judgement showed there is hope for democracy in TT under a government led by Persad-Bissessar.

While the Privy Council ruled against the Government's extension of the term of incumbent local government representatives by one year, it rejected Balgobin-Maharaj's arguments that the Constitution had been breached either by denying people's democratic participation in local government elections or by extending the incumbent representatives' terms by one year.

These positions were stated in sections 19 and 20 of the judgment.

Section 19 said, "There is no constitutional provision for any particular form of local government nor any constitutional right to participate in elections for local government assemblies, and that accordingly the appellant’s constitutional challenge must fail."

Section 20 said, "The term for which representatives have been elected is important but an increase by one year in the term of incumbent Councillors and Aldermen does not of itself breach any provision of the Constitution.