PPP not naming replacement MPs now

"If we win the case at the CCJ, and the prospects look good, and so if we win the case there then there will be no need for this, because Parliament will not reconvene and so we are waiting on the ruling from the CCJ", he said.

PPP not naming replacement MPs now

General Secretary of the PPP, Bharrat Jagdeo today said that his party will not be naming any new Members of Parliament to replace its dual citizenship MPs at this time.

Three of the party’s Members of Parliament have tendered their resignations because they hold dual citizenship and it is against the law for someone to sit as a Member of Parliament while holding dual citizenship.

All three members, Gail Teixeira, Odinga Lumumba and Adrian Anamyah have tendered their resignations from Parliament.

The Government will be replacing its three MPs who are dual citizens in the Parliament.

But speaking at his weekly press conference, Mr. Jagdeo said he prefers to await the outcome of the no-confidence case at the Caribbean Court of Justice and he is confident that the case will likely go in his favour.

“If we win the case at the CCJ, and the prospects look good, and so if we win the case there then there will be no need for this, because Parliament will not reconvene and so we are waiting on the ruling from the CCJ”, he said.

Questioned about his confidence in winning the case, the Opposition Leader said he believes that most of Guyana believes that the Guyana Court of Appeal ruling will not stand because the mathematics used in coming up with what constitutes a majority cannot stand.

He said if the ruling stands, it will have implications for all of the countries in the Caribbean.

Mr. Jagdeo said his party has written to several governments in the Caribbean encouraging them to pay attention to the case.

The Guyana Court of Appeal by a majority ruling, invalidated the no-confidence motion against the Guyana Government. Two of the three Judges on the Court of Appeal said 34 seats and not 33 seats were needed for the passage of the motion. The Judges said a simple majority and an absolute majority could not be treated as the same.

The CCJ will begin hearing arguments in the case in May.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login