House of Assembly should delay meetings – Atherley

Government’s decision to continue with the sitting of the Lower House has come as a shock to leader of the Alliance Party for Progress (APP), Bishop Joseph Atherley.

In an interview with Barbados TODAY, Bishop Atherley said he fully expected Parliament to be temporarily suspended as a result of the constitutional motion before the High Court questioning its validity.

Last Wednesday, former Attorney General Adriel Brathwaite, through his attorneys Queen’s Counsel Garth Patterson and Michelle Russell filed a suit challenging the makeup of Parliament on the basis that not all 21 members of the Senate had been appointed.

When the matter came up before Justice Cicely Chase in the Supreme Court last Friday, Patterson sought to find out whether Government intended to continue allowing the Lower and Upper Houses to meet.

Government’s legal representative Leslie Haynes Q.C., however, told the court he was not in a position to say as he had received no instructions.

Patterson had argued that if Parliament continued to meet and pass legislation and the court agreed with him in its decision, it meant those legislative changes would be deemed null and void.

He said while he was not seeking an injunction the “responsible thing” to do would be for Parliament to wait until a ruling was handed down.

The matter has been adjourned until February 25.

Yesterday, the Lower House convened and several Bills were passed.

Bishop Atherley said he was surprised there had actually been a debate considering the circumstances.

“I thought it was interesting that the lawyers for Adriel Brathwaite suggested they would not go for an injunction to stop the Parliament. I guess I understand that, but the matter really is before the court and one would have thought… that Government would have put a halt to any plans to convene meetings of the Lower House at this time.

“I was surprised to know that they went ahead with an actual debate and action in Parliament. I really thought they were meeting to adjourn because I think the date for that meeting would have been set prior to the court action. In instances where Parliament is set to convene then I know there have been instances in the past where circumstances have come up and they have convened only to adjourn, so I really thought that is the action that would have been taken by the Parliament and I was a bit surprised when they went ahead with an actual debate,” Bishop Atherley said.

“I guess it’s a matter of discretion on the part of the leader of the Government. I think perhaps were I in that position, I out of respect for the court and the process, would have put a halt on the proceedings of Parliament for the time being.”

The Senate has not met since the official opening of Parliament on February 4.

It was scheduled to convene last Wednesday but according to reports that did not materialize due to positive COVID-19 tests.
randybennett@barbadostoday.bb