“Judiciary should only interfere in Parliament when all else fails” – The Tribune

Excerpt from this article; “A Judge was told of Friday that judicial interference in internal affairs of Parliament should only occur when all other avenues have been exhausted when an issue arises.

In a substantive hearing on a constitutional motion before Justice Indra Charles concerning her injunction relating to the recent disclosure and tabling of private Save The Bays (STB) emails in Parliament, Crown representative Dr. Lloyd Barnett stressed that Section 54 of the Constitution entrenched the powers and responsibilities of Parliament.

He said that the current action ‘would be a direct interference with proceedings and trespass on internal affairs.’

He said judicial interference could only occur in the rarest of instances when all other avenues have been exhausted which could not be said in of the matter presently before the court.”

The first and most obvious question, to me, here would be what other avenues was STB’s to take when their private correspondence was being tabled and read in Parliament, as we seemed to have reached a point wherein we still seek ‘someone’ to define what is the ‘worst of the worst’ as it pertains to capital punishment; who will now define when judicial interference becomes necessary in the ‘rarest of instances’ when all the avenues have been exhausted?  When we begin to get serious in this country in the protection of the basic rights afforded to our citizens by the very same Constitution that Crown representative says gives the governing party the right to deny citizens the right to privacy without recourse? 

In a variation of Bill#4, as proposed in the upcoming referendum on gender equality, a hand out from the “Yes” Campaign says “[The] Bottom Line”: Prevents Parliament from passing any new laws that discriminate against either men or women, so that our sons and daughters are considered equal under the law”, and here it is a Environmental group cannot seem to avoid Parliament from violating their constitutional right to privacy.

All this time the parties looking to reveal the private emails have yet to give an explanation as to how the material was obtained while the crown representative speaks to “Section 54 of the Constitution entrenched the powers and responsibilities of Parliament.” as if this government has every acted in a responsible manner.

Shame!

The Progressive Liberal Party fails for one reason, it is within their nature.

END