Last Friday’s Senate hearing was quite telling in more ways than one. First it exposed the type of dictatorial system under which we live and secondly it exposed the hypocrisy of the once saintly Godwin Hulse. It also exposed a serious flaw in our Constitution and leaves us wondering if this Constitution is really only considered the supreme law of the land when it becomes convenient to those in power. The main focus of Friday’s meeting was a motion presented by Lisa Shoman, a Senator for the Opposition who issued a call for a Senate Inquiry into the lingering scandal at the Immigration Department. After some debate, the matter was put to a vote and that is where the situation got most interesting. As expected, the six senators for the government side all voted no. This I believe is solid proof that we are living in a dictatorship. Had this been a real democracy, members would be allowed to vote their minds. Anyone of sound mind, (which is a requirement for either House), would certainly recognize the need for an objective, impartial or at least bipartisan investigation into this very substantial matter. It seems that no one in either House is ever allowed to go against the whim of the Prime Minister. The biggest surprise of all is Godwin Hulse. For years, Godwin Hulse, who has served in the Senate since 2003, was considered a champion of the people. During the last administration, Hulse was on the radio on a daily basis, condemning anything that remotely resembled corruption. He was a founding member and integral part of the Association of Concerned Belizeans (ACB) which helped to bring down the previous government and install the present government. Even during the first UDP term of office, Godwin was on the air criticizing anything that seemed out of place. All that changed it seemed when in March 2012, shortly after the UDP was elected to their second term of office, Hulse was elevated from Senator to Minister of Government. In making the appointment, the Prime Minister revealed in an interview that, The fact that Godwin throughout the years has been a stern monitor, has been a kind of invigilator on behalf of the society, has been a watchdog, doesnt mean that he ever moved away from his UDP roots and his UDP support. He has been a sort of man for all seasons; in agriculture, with the chamber, all over the map. But one thing that has been constant has been the fact that Godwin is UDP. He was before the business senator, he is not going back into the cabinet as the business senator, he is going back into the senate as UDP government for business and as a UDP senator. We expect, and that is one of the reasons he has ask to join government that he will bring to the table in cabinet his same fierce anti-corruption position.” Well, in the Senate last Friday, Godwin’s UDP status was in full display but his invigilating and “anti-corruption position” was nowhere to be seen. The call for an independent investigation into the persistent and growing scandal at Immigration makes much sense. The Prime Minister and Godwin Hulse have both insisted that Godwin, who is in fact the Minister in charge of the same Immigration Department, be the one to head and conduct the investigation. To this point, it is still not clear to what extent Godwin himself is involved in the hustling at Immigration so it really makes no sense that he should be investigating himself. Something just doesn’t seem right. Many believe that Godwin Hulse should have at least recluse himself from the vote. Given his previous stance on such matters, one would have thought that Godwin would have readily voted yes. But, the lure of money and power has changed mightier men than Godwin! In the end, the President declared the final vote at seven to six. At that point, Honorable Shoman rose to object. She pointed out to the President that he had no vote in the matter and she was absolutely correct. Section 61-2 of the Constitution reads: If anyone who is not a Senator is selected to be President of the Senate, he shall, by virtue of holding the office of the President, be a Senator in addition to the twelve Senators referred to in Subsection (1). (This would seem to infer that he does have a vote) however, 61-3 reads: The President of the Senate shall have a casting vote in the event of an equality of votes in respect of any business at a meeting of Senate: Provided that if the President of the Senate- (a) Is a Senator, he shall have an original but not a casting vote, and (b) Is not a Senator, he shall not have a vote, when the Senate is deciding on any matter referred to in Section 61A (2) (d) of this Constitution. 61A (2) (d) refers to any matter: “instituting and conducting inquiries and investigation on any matter of public interest or importance, including inquiries into mismanagement or corruption by persons in central government or public statutory bodies. Folks, the Constitution is not always easy to understand but that area is pretty straight forward. How is it that Godwin Hulse, mister know it all, did not know that, or when brought to his attention, did not support that? Instead, he quickly called for an adjournment. Now here’s a confusion. Section 73-3 reads: A speaker elected from among persons who are not members of the House of Representatives or a President elected from among persons who are not Senators shall have no vote. Period! So, which is it, does he have a vote or doesn’t he have a vote? Either way, it supports the good Senator’s point. Now, here’s a thing! Section 75 reads: “……proceedings shall be valid notwithstanding that some person who was not entitled to do so sat and voted in the House or otherwise took part in the proceedings. “ I thereby put it to you dear readers, that last Friday’ sitting of the Senate was invalid. It also seems that some clarity is needed for this section of our Constitution. We are not talking about a white paper here folks; we are discussing the venerable and supreme law of the land. One more thing! It is high time that lessons on the Constitution be incorporated into the curriculum of all schools. University students in particular should know the Constitution from cover to cover and be allowed to give input and critique on the entire body with an end to tweaking and improving. We are too far along as a nation to be governed by a Constitution with such ambiguities. Long live Belize!
Posted on: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 14:38:20 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015