#BTSpeakingOut – Whose interests is the Attorney General serving?

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed by the author(s) do not represent the official position of Barbados TODAY. 

by Carlos Forte

Once again Attorney General Dale Marshall has demonstrated questionable judgement in providing legal advice to the Government of Barbados.

In his statements during a Barbados TODAY interview last Friday, on the issue of the Prime Minister’s proposed constitutional amendment to appoint Opposition Senators, the AG virtually admitted that the Democratic Labour Party, eminent lawyers and political scientists who have commented on the constitutionality of the matter are correct with respect to existing Presidential discretion to appoint the senators.

The President must not be relegated to being a passive ceremonial figure in a republic Barbados. Her powers and discretion are outlined by the Constitution and come into play at times of political constitutional crises or perceived constitutional grey areas.

Indeed, the role of the President and her independence should be strengthened in a republic Barbados, not weakened.

The opportunity for that will arise during the pending year-long consultations on a new constitution.

I am satisfied that sections 36 and 75 of the Constitution make adequate provision for the appointment of 21 senators in the absence of a Leader of the Opposition. The President could be expected to exercise her discretion to appoint a total of nine senators once Parliament has been properly constituted.

It is also the President’s constitutional prerogative to defer the appointment of two senators that would have otherwise been nominated by a Leader of the Opposition, or not to appoint those two senators.

Barbadians can be satisfied that Parliament, including the Senate can be constituted with or without the appointment of two of the 21 Senators.

They also ought to be satisfied that the President is not in a position to invoke sections 36 and 75 with respect to the appointment of two senators representing the interests of the Barbados electorate until such time as the new Parliament is convened and she is satisfied that an Opposition Leader cannot be appointed. Only then, can her discretion under Sections 36 and 75 be properly invoked.

Any move to amend the Constitution to “circumscribe the exercise of the President’s discretion” is both presumptuous and premature.

It is unnecessary, and also outside the scope of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet of Barbados at this time, as they should not presume to fix a problem that does not exist or presume to have a constitutional majority in the Senate.

I implore the Mottley administration to exercise restraint in the use of executive and parliamentary power and to allow for comprehensive consultations on the creation of a new Republic Constitution that would advance good governance and the best democratic traditions for generations to come.

Tinkering with the Constitution for political expedience is not in the national interest.
The issue as identified by the Prime Minister is nothing more than a manufactured political distraction. I supposed the distraction has already served its purpose!

Carlos Forte is a Barbadian economist and British Commonwealth Scholar with an avid interest in public affairs, public policy and national development. He can be contacted at c.r.forte@gmail.