(DNO) Attorney General Francine Baron-Royer has sought to clear speculations surrounding the issue of the Marigot and Salisbury seats being declared vacant.
The seats were announced as vacant by the Speaker of the House of Assembly earlier this month after representatives for the two constituencies missed three consecutive sittings of House of Assembly.
Baron-Royer told a press conference at the Ministry of Finance conference room this morning that though there has been much debate about the speaker’s authority in vacating the seats, the laws of the House of Assembly and the constitution of Dominica supports the her decision.
“There have been suggestions that because the Oath was not taken by those persons they did not become members of the House and therefore Standing Orders 15(2) which speaks to the vacation of seats by “members” of the House does not apply to them and also that the seats cannot be vacated until the High Court determined that they are vacant,” she stated.
“There is no suggestion in the constitution or any other law that an elected representative only becomes a member of the house when he has taken the oath. In fact, the contrary is the case. Anyone who has been elected as the representative or appointed a Senator is a member of the House,” the attorney general stated.
Baron-Royer further explained, “For instance, when the House first meets after a general election of representatives, its first order of business is to elect a Speaker. Section 36(2) of the constitution provides among other things that the speaker may be elected either among the members of the House or from among persons who are not members of the House.”
According to the attorney general, Section 35(1) of the constitution of Dominica refers to a representative as a member of the house.
She said that this section of the law “provides that a member shall vacate his seat in the House if he is absent from the sittings of the House for such period and in such circumstances as may be prescribed in the rules of the procedure of the House.”
Baron-Royer believes that since the oath is administered by the Speaker who has to be appointed by members before that oath is administered, one who is elected as a representative becomes a member of the house whether the person had taken the oath or not.
She said that taking the oath of allegiance gives the member a seat in the parliament which allows him to participate in affairs of the house.
The attorney General also stated that despite the suggestions that seats must be vacated by the High Court, Section 40 of the constitution merely grants the High Court with the “ jurisdiction to make a determination on the question whether a seat has in fact become vacant where that issue is in despute.”
“For example, a member may wish to dispute whether Standing Order 15(2) was properly applied when his seat was declared vacant. He may wish to establish for example that he did not in fact miss three consecutive sittings of the house…,” Baron-Royer continued.
According to Baron-Royer bar elections are due to take place within three months of the seats being vacated.
TO STAY TUNED
Tell me my friend do you have your own Constitution? Allow me to help you a lilttle ok. Please, NO INSULTS. Voters go to the Polls to fill Palriamentary Seats made vacant by the dissolving of Parliament. As soon as the Election Results are confirmed and sent to the President by the Chief Electrions Officer, the twenty one winners are automatically Members of Parliament. If that was not the case, then these sucessful candidates would NOT have the authority to appoint the SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, who MUST be appointed by the MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT, before these very MEMBERS, take their oath of Office and allegiance to the Parliament. If we insult each other less and put away our colors just maybe we all can learn from this situation so we could then educate our kids or keep a civil conversation on the LAW and its intepretation. Section 40 of the Constitution makes provisions for hearing of a case to decide if Section 15(2) was correctly applied to a particular member ok. The Rules of the house clearly states when a seat becomes vacant, and the Speaker of the HOUSE is responsible for executing or applying the Rules of the House and that is why in the recent past UWP members applied for leave for various reasons.UWP knows the procedures. It is not the member who decides whether or not he vacates his seat. The Rules state that once he misses three consequetive sittings of the same session without leave of the Speaker, HE SHALL VACATE HIS SEAT. The word SHALL does not leave room for descretion.It means the member would have fired himself. If the members of the UWP are of the view that their seats were declared vacant wrongfully, then, they have section 40 of the Constitution available to seek redress. I hope that I have assisted you my friend. PEACE.
you have no idea on what grounds the UWP was formed. i know that much!
and it certainly wasnt venom.
staytuned- i could not have said it better!
I would really like to hear from the President himself about his speech and what he meant when he addressed Dominicans.
In the 1970’s I can recall reading a readers Digest with this interesting story with a message .
During WW2 there was a young soldier whose father was the general.The general told the young soldier to go tell a certain field officer that he should move his troops west of where they had been.
the young soldier took off on his bike down the valleys and up the Austiran outbacks.Upon arrival he greeted his superior .The staed the following:” Sir my daddy said take the troops west of here.”
The officer lookat him then said: “Fine” Then asked the young soldier:”what did your mammy say?
This morning I was listening to Q95 news when the news read:” frank Baron father of AG Francine baron said.” I wonder what did her mother say?”
This morning Q95 news stated Frank Baron father of AG Francine Baron said………bla,bla,bla May I ask: What did her mother say?
It reminds me of a joke i read when i was in high school back in the 70’s in a readers digest.
A young soldier during the second world war somewhere in Austria was asked by the general ( who happened to be the young soldier’s dad)to go to a field Sergent who was in a particular area in Austria to go inform the field officer to take his troops west of where they were.
Off went the young lance corporal up and down the hills and valleys on his motor bike. When he arrived he went directly to the Officer ,saluted him and said Officer sir, My father said take the troops west of here. The officer then asked:” And what did your mother say?”
while i understand that we are not there yet,i would like to know what will happen in the event that the byelection is held and these very same people win back there sits and still continue to boycott parliament, is there a clause in the constitution that deals with that? somebody help me.
uwp supporters and the so called journalist lennox linton, where is the honesty and integrity u all speak about so much. if u all had any doubt in your mind that wat the speaker did was so wrong, and all u so verse with the constitution, why did norris prevost took the oath in the parliament?
and all u dam well knows that it was 3 strikes and out, cuz if all u know wat all u saying is the gospel truth, please come out in the public and condem Prevost move
More confusion: A person becomes a member of the house when they are declared winner but only get a seat when they take the oath. So by not taking the oath they have no seat in parliament. Yet the seat is vacated when they miss 3 sittings in parliament. If the seats are not automatic and they were not given how can they lose what they didnt have? I am wondering can a member seat in parliament without taking oath seeing that he can lose his seating without taking the oath and what is the significance of the oath in a member getting his seat in parliament?
the principle theme of the law is suppose to be justice or what i call “that higher expediency”, but at the end of the day law is almost always about the subjective interpretation of exceptionally small detail-always keep in mind that the method of reason is logic(inductive-deductive) and reason’s only instrument is in fact argument, so i guess may the best argument win.
Just talk to ur fadah b4 u call press confrence….he seems to be suffering from senile dementia or old age……when he is speaking his crap about PM & he & ez, breezy, mountain worshipper masturbating pon d radio…at least her fadah was holding his walking stick, I’m left to wonder what stick ez, breezy mountain worshipper holding?
the greatest enemy of knowledge is ignorance..
Whappen STAY TUNNED? Were u looking in the mirror and had a moment of self revelation? Just becuz u didn’t get the essence of the comment the first time doesn’t mean the author is ignorant…in fact I am anything BUT IGNORANT…so take a chill pill, sip on ur hateraid n read d damn thing over! ……Now go do ur duty n call all comments pro Skerrit & The Labour Party grief n leave Baroness in her peace!…….. sackway kakabawi!
your comments says it all…..your own comments giving you blows..lol…go back and read your first post again..slowly….and tell me if you not feeling a LITTLE ignorant and stupid….haha
What happen the masturbation part u cannot understand man STAY TUNNED?! dick head
all u workers just want to confuse people but we smarter than that! if all u so sure all u sit not vacant why prevost go ? all u think we stupid? ha ha 90 more days! go AG labour power all the time!
Aiding and abetting the slow demise of our Parliament? The law is now important and should be respected? But in many other instances the laws have not been effected especially when your colleagues are involved? The AG pretends to be MOO MOO very often on matters regarding disrespect for the Constitution, much to the surprise of the people.
Tell that AG to comment on the RUBBISH BIN BOBOL, FERTILIZER BOBOL, SUSAN OLDE and US$400,000.00, the Layou River Hotel SAGA with DAVID HSUI, Dominica’s former ambassador to China. What about CITIZENS FOR A BETTER DOMINICA, that FLY-BY-NIGHT NGO. What has that organisation been involved in? Who is involved in that NGO? What project or programme of work has that NGO undertaken in Dominica?
AG the Dominican people are also waiting for your comments on the recent revelations by Jerry Brisbane on CONTRACTS and the millions of dollars overcharged which the tax payers have to pay. Francine Baron-Royer, No comments either on disobeying the laws pertaining to bribery of persons, inducing someone overseas with free plane tickets to come with the sole purpose of voting for DLP. No comments Francine on the total disregard for the decision of Parliament to produce VOTER ID CARDS as recommended by the CHIEF ELECTIONS OFFICER years ago? Are you aware of the person or persons who put a spoke in the wheel of that parliament decision?
We have not heard any comments by that same AG on the illegal actions of a well known business man in the initial operations re. the building of an asphalt plant in LAYOU. No license was obtained from PLANNING DIVISION to begin operations. Yet he started and even imported the equipment before an EIA was submitted or license obtained. No comments Francine Baron-Royer about the illegal actions by the foreigner who was starting to mine in Coulibistrie again without license from PLANNING. On top of that, the same foreigner was caught dredging sand from the Layou River, again bold enough defying the laws of Dominica and doing that activity without Planning permission. The evidence was there to see. Up to now nothing has happened. That AG is MOO MOO on those actions which all agree are against the Law. Of course, DOMINICANS, there should be no illusions that the AG was appointed by the ruling party, therefore the person given a job by the party in GOVT. will go all out to protect anything that GOVT does, wrong or right.. Enjoy your stint as AG, Excercise your POWER for now on those you think are weak. There is a greater POWER above.
Lord Chancellor Lennox Linton BC (Birth Certicicate) is the legal adviser of the UWP. What a shame!!
UWP has metamorphed into a pressure group with no direction and leadership.
They depend on a non lawyer for legal advise.
OH boy!!!!! you wish you had the brains of Mr Linton stop hating, he is only doing what so many of you failed to do . so continue burying your head in the sand and take your blows as they come LEAVE LENNOX ALONE!!!
Lennox?? Brains??? Please because a person speaks loudly or elloquently does not mean brains, Lennox cousin… Poor you Marigotians
well it appears that YOU have no brains…cause there is no such word as “marigotians”…you sound juvenile…16…17? or less?…We pity you…you know not what you do.
Well done Madame AG.
I agree with you to some extent. Its good that a trained, professional, very experienced attorney is speaking out on the issue. When good people stay quiet, then the likes of “between You and me’ takes over with mis-information, irrespective of the clarity, articulation and eloquence of the Lennox.
My question to the Ag. Since a person becomes a member of the house as soon as he/she is declared the winner of an election competition in a constituency, how then do you explain that the two boycotting members of the house have not been paid their emoluments because they have not taken their oath of office? That to me is very interesting. Is this a matter for the High Court or the court of the “Hot Seat”?
The question is who are the advisors of the UWP? I hope it’s not the investigative journalist turned lawyer because they seem to be consistently misinterpreting the law. The UWP is not only an embarrassment to themselves but also the country. We need an opposition with good brains because those that we have apparently have very little.
That one finally get her coaching she outside with her shinning face yapping. Please, lady nobody checking for you, you are ineffective and out of touch with reality big time. So long for you to speak now you coming> Francine fall back
are you normally so stupid or did you have to take classes all she is doing is quoting the constitution of the country how is she out of touch of reality
My goodness, Javelin please think and read before you hit the send button ok dear??
I like to hear the fact! Thanks very much Attorney General. The Speaker also gave a very factual letter. All we hear from the Opposition is pure nonesence. Thanks for giving us an educated slant on the topic!
Nice to see that madame AG has finally become vocal and doing something for a change.
Good for you Mr. Speaker and Madam AG.
How it that these elected representatives of the people can arbitrarily (with content) negate the importance of their ‘duly elected’ role, as constituency representation of the people?
If I were the Speaker, I would call for a Bi-election to have them replaced by persons willing to represent the people, as constitutionally mandated!
The opposition continues to criticize and condemn the government, yet they are unwilling participants in due process procedures, and willing to ‘arbitrarily relegate the right of representing their constituents!
Shame I say!
Chris,
Don’t you think that these guys are operating on an oxymoron?? One minute they don’t this and they don’t that. How can they just take the ppl votes like its something willed to them and do whatever they way with it.
Take that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
take what? You doh even understand what the AG say there.but hear you..”take that”…hahaha..TAKE WHAT?….AH?…lol…
The AG has just tied up the speaker a bit more….alas…poor them…and poor the supporters that does just get wet over anything they say…
Staytuned, it appears that you understand nothing writen, spoken or [resented through sign. I suspect you are just plain wicked. You are too politically blind to understand what the AG said. She is awise woman who took the time to research the matter before speaking. Something you are unable or unwilling to do. IF you were around long enough, i would have concluded that the pattern for the v w bettle with the engine in the …….. was based on your mental faculty.
You see my friend…and fellow dominican…
Statements such as that of the Attorney General prepared by Tony and other political advisors of the DLP are designed to fool people like you. I am not one of the gullible persons in this country who believe anything people in “position” says. You are questioning my ability to read and understand. The question is: have you taken the time to read for yourself and understand for yourself? The Dominica constitution can be obtained online on the government’s website.
I have read and I have understood that after a general election, all 21 seats in the house are vacant until the first seating of parliament where the elected members take their oath and their seat. Therefore, it is after they take their respective seats that they are no longer vacant. Then, if they now miss 3 consecutive seatings of the house then the seat which they took now becomes vacant again and in this case a bi-election can be called.
You cannot vacate a position that is already vacant. With that said, I want to make it clear that I totally disagreed with Prevost going in and taking his seat. This made no sense based on what the constitution says. It appears the this decision was taken by UWP before understanding what the constitution says and its only after the speaker did what she did they went and research.
So my friend, my mental faculty is quite fine. I can choose to engage in this kinda discussions if I feel like. I can choose to make 2 sentence smart remarks if I feel like. You however, are in no position to analyze my level of understanding.
Go get that constitution and start reading and stop allowing yourself to be fooled by people “in position”. You need to go find out why they going back to parliament on the 25 of May which is next week tuesday. Stay close to your radio on that day and listen.
One of the major problems facing Dominica is that, certain people who hold these prestigious positions are those who the ignorant and not so intelligent look up to for truthful analysis and information on issues of state. Unfortunately, their personal feelings and emotions supersedes the laws, procedures and standard practices. When called upon to give a logistic view on certain issues, that view is driven by their desire to keep their jobs and to continue getting favors from Government all for financial benefit.
Do you know what the A.G salary is? 14000 dollars my friend.
Have a Blessed day.
StayTuned, me and you on the same wavelength.
Here is the low down in plain English – From Me A Lawyer with Many Years standing at the Bar in Dominica, Tortola, Grenada, St.Lucia.
The constitution never gave anyone in the house to “to declare any seat vacant” not even parliament as a body has that authority according to the constitution.
As the AG rightfully said, the constitution says ” the member shall vacate his seat” it did not say the seat “shall be declared vacant” . Notice how the AG is using both terms in her statement like it means the same thing. It does not!
The members in question wrote the speaker back and indicating that “they did not vacate their seat” and that she should provide the authority cited when “she declared their seat vacant”.
Now what you have here is a question as to wheather a “seat has become vacant”.
Section 40 of the constitution provides a resolution for that question be answered in the court.
The answer in Section 40 is: The constitution provides for only an Elected member, or a voter in the constituency or the Attorney General Herself to Go to Court to get the court to make a declaration that the seat has indeed become vacant/ “the member has vacated his seat”
But all this only applies if as STAYTUNED rightfully said, the member had taken the oath which is required to take his seat in the first place.
Example, if my prevost now decideds to skip parliament 3 times, then all this would apply to him. It does not apply to anyone who has not taken the oath and therefore has not taken his seat.
The constitution does imply that there can be a elected representative, a member of parliament who has not taken his seat. Now because the constitution and the standing orders does not have this specific wording in them, then we must revert to the practice of the house of commons in England and basically be guided by the standing orders and practices there. ( with some legal fix-up however) . It is safe to say that the house of commons does provide for an elected member who has not taken his seat in parliament.
Tell the Attorney General to go back to research and consult with smarter people than her, and in the interest of jurisprudence she will sustain what has been written here
That is my piece/peace. ( don’t mind the spelling mistakes ;), no time to check)
STAY TUNED, do yourself a favour please: Will you and your family stop being blind with the ability to only see blue????
lol..my family…if you only knew who my family is…you would know that it is mixed with blues..reds..and even greens….So stick to the ignorant and gullible talk…please don’t down that “you and your family” road…hahahaha
the people put u there to do there work and u did not show up for work so u out
nxt
listening in Texas it became clear that the labor party will eventually become a one party goverment with the vacancies of the prominent seats vacated by the parliamentary representatives for the marigot and salsbury. In my mind that may have been deliberately planned by the members who felt that the defeat in the last election was to ubearing to even take the oath in representing their constituencies.
Hay Hay Now they write that address for you. So long they speaker had her press conference now u comin to clarify. Speaker saying one thing; President saying another thing; Ag saying another another thing. Who is right. Well Well I find all u really interested in our seats. you all have 18 seats so why bother with the others. We not in the house we not in the house leave us in the yard.
All you want us to enter the house then for all you to say we chicken out. Well Madam Speaker and Madam AG and all the Labour puppets we aint goin back on our word. goin to the house says we agree that election was fair etc. Prevo act was different we wanted to block all u labour tricks hehehehehehe ( Some body mad boi ) well we are waiting on u alls so call by elections LET THE GAMES BEGIN
To Patat
NOW YOU TAKE THAT, LET THE GAMES BEGIN!!! HEHEHEHE LOOK MEYLAY!
Ou too sott……………
why vote for someone who has deliberately refrained from doing what he was voted to do in the first place?
NO GAMES!!!
Sam said the Game was up, remember. He quit before it began.
You are fool ! the AG had to think before saying anything. only fool’s in UWP
BE QUIET!!!! JUST REMAIN IN DE YARD. THATS IS WHERE YOU ALL BELONG.
LABOUR POWER!!!
LOL, Workass is one bit party is not funny. And that Sprags is one arse thinking he will be leader of party one day, Not in this lifetime. The cliche that says what goes around comes around is true. Workass have no good agenda. That Party was formed on vemon and it will die bitter.
RIP Workass.