Jack says courts to decide

| 04/05/2009

(CNS): In a one paragraph statement, Governor Stuart Jack has broken his silence regarding the failure of two political candidates to meet the requirements on time for election under the 1972 Cayman Island Constitution section 19 1(g). Citing his statement as “clarification” the governor said he fully expects all candidates in the forthcoming general election to operate within the terms of the Constitution and the applicable laws of the Cayman Islands. “Should there be any cases of possible non-compliance with the legal requirements that would be a matter for the courts to decide,” he said.

However, this so-called clarification has not actually answered the fundamental question being asked by voters regarding the qualification of both Mark Scotland and Dwayne Seymour, UDP candidates for the district of Bodden Town who failed to declare their public contracts with government in accordance with Section 19 of the constitution.

The two candidates and the party as a whole have declared on a number of occasions that they believe Scotland and Seymour do now qualified as they have published their contracts, albeit some four days late. They have also claimed support for this position from both Attorney General Samuel Bulgin and Supervisor of Elections Kearney Gomez, both of whom say they have not made any statements that declare the candidates to be qualified.

As reported on CNS on a number of occasions, Gomez has said that the Elections office cannot state one way or the other over this issue as it is a Constitutional matter and not one governed by the Elections Law. Gomez confirmed that position in writing to all media houses on Friday (1 May) following a statement published as an advertisement in the local print media UDP General Secretary, which said that the elections office and the Attorney General had confirmed that Scotland and Seymour were entitled to contest the election.

In contrast Gomez said: “The Elections Office wishes to advise all media houses and the public that we have not confirmed to anyone one way or the other that any of the candidates in the 2009 General Elections are qualified or not qualified to be elected as members of the Legislative Assembly. This issue is not one to be determined by the Elections Office it is a matter for a court of law.”

The attorney general has also confirmed that his office has not said that the candidates are qualified as that will be determined by the Grand Court should there be a challenge following the election. The governor has now also added his comment which indicates that the law and the constitution must be adhered to.

Since the revelation on CNS that the two candidates missed the deadline for the constitutional requirement of declaring public contracts, the candidates’ eligibility to stand has been thrown into question.

Although it is anticipated that a number of Bodden Town candidates will challenge either of the two UDP candidates if they gain enough votes that would see them elected, there could be a challenge by Bodden Town voters before election day as some legal experts believe there could be provision in the Constitution for that and have the candidates removed from the ballot.

Currently both candidates were duly nominated on 25 March — Nomination Day — because the provision in the Constitution did not have to be met until more than three weeks after that date. As a result, the two are on the ballot and there is no clear provision in either the Elections Law or the Constitution for their names to be removed, even if they are no longer qualified to stand for election.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Election 2009

Comments (44)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Dennie Warren Jr. says:

    Dear Anonymous – 20:18,

    I’m sure you notices that I was responding specific question by 7:14

    You’re correct; at times I can be long-winded, so I’ll work on it, but due to the number of issues raised in your post, my reply might be a little too lengthy for you.  However, you are totally incorrect to assume that my call for Messrs Scotland and Seymour to bow out is because of a concern over PPM’s electability.  Before going public, I first phoned up Mr. Scotland and privately asked him to bow out; my continued call for them to withdraw is based on principle.

    By asking, “…why don’t you let this go?” you clearly fail to understand or accept that my concern is about the rule of law and thus the importance of respecting the Constitution.  Hopefully one day you will appreciate the significance of my view point and join my efforts.  If you don’t respect the constitution, then why should I believe that you, the UDP or any other persons ignoring section 19(1)(g) will respect any other constitutional clauses, other laws, or will be a good lawmaker?

    If the Bodden Town people don’t want the PPM I can and will respect their wishes, but by asking me to disrespect the constitution by ignoring section 19(1)(g), you should take a few minutes out of your day to consider the consequences of such a suggestion.  When you encourage others to ignore any clause of the existing constitution, you encourage lawlessness which will not serve the Cayman Islands wellin the end.

    If you are unhappy with the performance of the PPM, then let’s maturely talk about the issues one at a time and stop the name calling and personal attacks.  For you to suggest that I ask candidates to bow out without legal reason is pure political rhetoric.

    A legitimate reason for bowing out is where Messrs Scotland and Seymour have breached section 19(1)(g) of the constitution and they have, even they admit that fact.

  2. paul ebanks says:

    Mark and John John Bodden Towners got your back. Ossie and chuckie monster got to go!!! 

  3. Anonymous says:

    Good Lord Dennie,you are as long-winded on here as you are on the radio. Listen, the people of Bodden Town will make their choice on May 20. Are you so worried thatt the PPM will lose and you will have no choice but to be a spoiler and complain about Mark and Dwayne winning?

    If you and the PPM are so sure you are going to win in Bodden Town, why don’t you let this go. We all know that your real beef is not the constituition but trying to find some way to get a seat for some of the PPM candidates.

    Listen again Dennie, no matter how you try the people of Bodden Town don’t want the PPM anymore. They have failed us miserably. It’s their time to go. Why don’t you ask them to do the graceful thing and bow out.

     

    NO MORE RED PARTY IN BODDEN TOWN!!

  4. Dennie Warren Jr. says:
    Dear “Honestly somebody help me” at “07:14”:
     
    Here are the basic facts:
    Elections Office Press Release:
    On January 27, 2009 the Elections Office reminded prospective candidates to check the law and the constitution saying, “All prospective candidates should endeavour to acquire copies of the Cayman Islands Constitution and familiarize themselves with the sections 18 and 19 of this document before Nomination Day, which is March 25th 2009. Copies of this document may be obtained from the Legislative Assembly.”
     
    Candidates Handbook:
    All candidates were provided with a “Candidates Handbook” which also quoted section 19 of the current constitution verbatim. Therefore, no candidate can truthfully say they were not informed.  In any event, it always is and will always be the responsibility of each prospective candidate to know the Constitution, other laws, rules, conventions, etc.
     

    CNS Related Articles:
    Candidates fail to meet constitutional requirement 04/23/2009
     
    Late gazette does not qualify UDP candidates 04/26/2009
     
    Candidates still in question 04/28/2009
     
    UDP denies disqualification 04/30/2009
     
    Jack says courts to decide 05/04/2009

    Excerpts from the current Constitution:
    Section 18(1) reads, “Subject to the provisions of the next following section [(Section 19)], a person shall be qualified to be elected as a member of the Assembly if, and shall not be qualified to be so elected unless…” Read the balance here

    Section 19(1)(g) reads, “No person shall be qualified to be elected as a member of the Assembly who is a party to, or a partner in a firm or a director or manager of a company which is a party to, any contract with the Government of the Islands for or on account of the public service and has not, in the case of a contested election, caused to be published, at least one month before the day of the poll, a Government Notice setting out the nature of such contract and his interest, or the interest of any such firm or company, therein”

     
    Other Basic Facts:
    On Nomination Day, which was March 25, 2009, Messrs Scotland and Seymour were at the time both considered by the Elections Office to be qualified to be elected, therefore, their nominations were accepted. However, like all other candidates, Messrs Scotland and Seymour each had a post Nomination Day obligation to publish information via the Cayman Islands Gazette in accordance with section 19(1)(g) of the Constitution regarding contracts between the companies owned by themselves respectively and the Cayman Islands Government, but by midnight on April 20, 2009 Messrs Scotland and Seymour had not “caused to be published” the information required in section 19(1)(g).

    On April 26, 2009 it was reported by CNS that, “Both men have stated openly that the failure to publish their government contracts before the deadline was an oversight and not a deliberate attempt to deceive.

     

    The consequence for failing to publish the information as required in section 19(1)(g) is that they are no longer “… qualified to be elected …”

     
    In accordance with the Elections Law (2004 Revision), a candidate is not considered “to be elected” until the returning officer for the said District, in this case Bodden Town, has declared the names of the three candidates who have gained the most votes on Election Day as prescribed in section 59 of the law.

    Governor: Candidates to Follow Law  "In response to recent requests from the media, politicians and interested members of the public for clarification regarding certain election candidates’ declared interests in Government contracts, H E the Governor Mr Stuart Jack has said that he fully expects all candidates in the forthcoming general election to operate within the terms of the Constitution and the applicable laws of the Cayman Islands. Should there be any cases of possible non-compliance with the legal requirements that would be a matter for the courts to decide."

     "Candidates vulnerable to failed disclosures… Denying a UDP claim that “our candidates are satisfied they have made full and frank disclosure and been completely transparent,” Supervisor of Elections Kearney Gomez told Cayman Net News the two candidates would be vulnerable to challenge in the Grand Court after any election victory, although both Mark Scotland and Dwayne Seymour are still at liberty to run as candidates."

    Summary of main Facts:

    On Nomination Day, which was March 25, 2009, Messrs Scotland and Seymour were both duly nominated, their nominations were accepted by the Elections Office who alse declared them to be candidates contesting the Election in the district of Bodden Town, because they were qualified to be elected on the date of nomination.

    After nomination Day, Messrs Scotland and Seymour both failed to published the government contract information as required by section 19(1)(g) of the Constitution before April 20, 2009, which caused them to no longer be qualified to be elected.

    My Opinion:
    Even if every single voter in Bodden Town were to give them both a vote on Election Day, this matter must still go to Court because the Constitution should not be ignored and the Court would not allow them to continue to be elected as MLAs.

     
    Messrs Scotland and Seymour have completely failed to meet their post Nomination Day obligation to publish the details of government contracts by midnight on April 20, 2009.
     
    The mature way forward is for Messrs Scotland and Seymour to drop out prior to 10 days before Election Day.
  5. Caymanian to the bone says:

    The usual "send off or farewell parade" for Stuart Jack by the RCIPS should not even take place, when he departs our shores this year.

    He should simply be escorted to the departure lounge (No VIP Lounge) at the airport and allowed to board British Airways on his one way ticket paid for by the Caymanian Tax Payers, back to the UK.

    He is the worst Governor we have ever had since 1962, when Jamaica decided to go Independent and our forefathers decided to maintain it connections with the UK, thus UK Governors in our islands became a permanent symbolic figure of her Majesty the Queen.

    I thought many years ago when we had Governor Alan Scott whom had a Caymanian mistress and fathered a Caymanian child, was a disgrace to the UK and the Cayman Islands, but Stuart Jack have way surpassed his shame and disgrace.  I’m sure old Caymanian folks remember that, as reported in the Caymanian Compass back then

    I’m calling on Caymanians and residents alike to come together in unity and solidarity, to peacefully assemble in large numbers, at the airport on his departure with banners and placards reading, "Jack the Cayman Ripper- Good Riddance" in November or whenever he is scheduled to leave.

    I trust that whichever Government of the day it may be, (PPM, UPD, Independents) that no Cayman Staus be granted to him by Cabinet. What a SHAME SHAME SHAME if that should happen and whosoever should dare consider it or do it, be prepared to be labeled accordingly.

     

  6. Anonymous says:

    Go UDP!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We taken a CLEAN SWEEP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    These poor PPM supports can’t believe their eyes and ears…..they KNOW they not going to win this!!!!

    MARK and JOHN JOHN……….doesn’t matter if there’s 10 elections….you both going in!!!!!!!!!!! 🙂

    It’s crying time again…..the PPM will be uncrowned!!!!!! YEA!!!!!

  7. One Person? says:

    We, the people the Cayman Islands, will pay for this. NOT PPM OR UDP!

    Mark we are honestly disappointed in you.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Honestly somebody help me  WHO is RIGHT and WHO is WRONG .Mr Jack said its the courts ,Mr Gomez said its the court,The PPM and the PUBLIC said its the court .Now the UDP still trying to say its NOT SO .WHO IS LYING ?????? Mark said PPM has people in the same problem as he and John John. If that is so why no one else is speaking about it ??Silence from Mr Jack,Mr Gomez,and the PUBLIC so it cant be TRUE ???HELP HELP someone PLEASE tell me the truth !!!

    CNS: Mark Scotland and Dwayne Seymour are the only two candidates that we know did not meet the requirements under the constitution to declare their public contracts with government by the deadline as stated in Sections 19 1 (g). Many other candidates registered their interests late at the Legislative Assembly – an entirely different law -which does not impact their ability to contest an election and has no significant sanctions. That register is designed for candidates to reveal the businesses they own and has nothing to do with the requirement under the constitution which is not about ‘interests’ as such but about actual contracts.

  9. Anonymous says:

    The UDP won’t be the ones spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on an investigation, the PPM will when they lose and the only way they feel they can get in is to spend hundreds of thousands trying to unseat an elected member.

    Which of course they will lose again in a bi-election since it doesn’t disqualify anyone from running in the bielection.    PPM supporters just aren’t that bright.  This is obvious the country is in historical debt, historical fiscal problem, with a collpasing financial sector over the last 4 years, more than 200 banks has left, 70+ million spent on buldings, no one kid any smarter.  Crime at an all tiem high etc etc and the list goes on these baffoons want another 4 years of that crap.

    If anyone should flip the bill is who ever brings this BS argument and forces a bi-election after the will of the people has been made clear by the voters.  PPM!

     

    • Anonymous says:

      "PPM supporters just aren’t that bright".

      This is hilarious considering the fools the UDP leadership made of themselves last week with thier press release that ended up with a Compass headline int he Friday newspaper: "UDP eligibility claims rebutted‘.  The complete inability of UDP supporters to reason clearly is shwon by practically all their posts on CNS. It’s same old party mantra.

  10. Show us your briefs! says:

    Where are the famous legal opinions that the UDP claim back the candidates right to run?  No one has made out a barely credible case for these two yet.  So come on guys put us out of our misery and let us see what the opinions say.  if you really believe in open and transparent government then prove it now!

  11. Anonymous says:

    I don’t really have a preference as to whether Mark or John John are able to proceed with this election.  However, if they are elected and there is a challenge, they should personally have to pay for every single expense that arises from this.  The people of Cayman should not have to pay one penny for this.

  12. Disappointed Voter says:

    I’m so disappointed and right now I’m hoping that England will step in and resolve this issue. The last time I checked the Governor was placed here to uphold and defend the Constitution guess he’s getting paid for nothing then. I cant believe that after all the grumbling he issues a one paragraph statement and nothing is done. Why waste money to take it to court to find that they are disqualified there is no way out of this. This section is the same in the new and old constitution. At this point I have to agree with another poster we might as well do this election AMERICAN IDOL style and phone in our choices as it’s definately a personality contest now and the law has nothing to do with it. I wonder if Simon and Paula Abdul are available for final judging!

    A note to UDP please get a new script and next time find people who can actually read them.

    Sad really sad…………

     

    • Anonymous says:

      England step in and resolve this issue? where do think that the Governor got his instrustions from. Caymanian wakeup !! Mother country DON’TCARE about us. They are standing by waiting to cut us off!!!!….if you think that this is a joke;think again!!!.

      This is why we have to think and think hard as to who we elect to run this country…we better send persons of soild education background, and understanding. a heart. The days of sending persons whom we like; "the nice guys" will not work.

      God help us all to seek his guidance in this election.

  13. Anonymous says:

    Look STOP THIS!!!

    They can not be seated. They made a mistake and they have to pay the price. I was going to vote for them but they made a mistake and it has costed them the election.

    Stop laying blame to everything and everyone other than who deserves it. The constitution while not perfect was clear on this.

    Also, you can’t tell me no one knew in their party what had to be done. Do they not talk? Didn’t Mark do thsi last elections?

    First of all these guys all have personal lawyers who they work with for their business. Why did they not just contract their lawyer to handle these matters for them?

    This is not about PPM, UDP or Independents it’s just about the LAW. They were required by LAW to do something by a certain time and they didn’t and that is as plain as it comes.

    Fact is their error as innocent as it might be has made them INeligible to be seated.

  14. Anonymous says:

    PPM, why are you so bent on getting Mark and Dwayne out of the race. If you believe you are going to win, why worry.

    This whole thing will mean absolutely nothing if the PPM wins because they would not anything to challenge. The problem is that they know that Bodden Town is fed up with the PPM and this is their only chance of maybe getting at least of of the seats in BT.

    Sorry PPM, you had your day. You won’t fool us again!

    Let the Bodden Town people decide! 

     

  15. whodatis says:

    Wow – this entire thing has turned into one huge circus hasn’t it?!

    It is amazing the depth of personal attacks and assassination of character that goes on in Cayman.

    It is clear that this "election" is nothing but a personality competition. The party system here in Cayman is absolutely pointless as there exist no identifiable policies on either side!

    I am sure all of you here – whether a PPM or UDP supporter – would be hard pressed to explain to a non-Caymanian your reasons for supporting PPM vs UDP and vice versa.

    As I see it there are no trends or consistencies in their leadership – be it economic, immigration, tourism, financial industry.

    Which is Labour? Which is Conservative? Which is Democrat? Which is Republican?

    Both have made some horrendous decisions in the past and both have obviously achieved a few goals in the country.

    Nothing but more of the same if you ask me.

    (Sigh.)

  16. One Person? says:

    To For the Person who’s Statement is Mark and Joke Joke. This is to you WHO CARES  1 vote less 1 worry less.

    You may be wishing it’s only the thoughts of 1 person. You will see.

  17. Decider says:

    If Dwayne Seymour said on the radio this morning that Charles Clifford was late in filing his declaration of interests at the LA then thats just another lie coming from the UDP as they try to put up a smoke screen. I have checked the register of interests and i can assure you that Minister Clifford filed his interests in accordance with the law AND ON TIME. Can John John and Mark say the same about themselves with respect to the Constitutional requirement that they file the details of any government contracts 30 days before election day. No they cannot and therefore neither of the two of them can be returned by the Returning Officer in Bodden Town. If Mark got elected I guess ARCP would not just get some govt contracts but rather would get all govt contracts from election day forward….after all that ho the UDP operates. Thats the hidden agenda and thats why they didnt want to declare their existing contracts in the first place. I wonderif any other UDP members have shares in MCM or ARCP ? Lets research that.

  18. Lack of Integrity says:

    The problem here is pure adn simple – ARROGANCE!

    Mark is the most arrogant person is BT.

  19. B.T Voter says:

    What a bunch of fullishness going on here PPM let Go!!!You will never win in Bodden Town again…Last four years was the biggest mistake we did.Please Vote the PPM(Poor People Mistake) out!!!Vote UDP and one independent

  20. Ostuart bin Jackin says:

    Somebody toss this joker off the island – please?

  21. Anonymous says:

    The usual story in Cayman. Nobody has any authority (or the balls) to make a challenging decission . The same holds true when it comes to immigration or planning law issues. Everyone who wants to can build their house without the proper permit as planning has no authority to rip anything down,and no politican wants to make such a call as that could mean loss of votes. Pathetic! And then you all wonder why Cayman is the way it is now. As usual, everybody just wants to have a high profile job and the salary that comes with it (Governor, AG, Leader of Government etc) and then nobody wants to take a stand.

  22. Publish or be . . . . says:

    These two candaidates claim to have obtained two legal opinions that say they are eligible.  Why don’t they publish them if that is the case?  What are they hiding?  Given that every lawyer seems to agree their arguments are hopeless, at the very least it would give the profession a  good chuckle.

  23. Anonymous says:

    It is clear that the candidates have been duly nominated and are standing in May 20th election, their names remain on the ballot.

    This situation has shown the problem that exists with the constitution that can potentially disenfranchise the voters. The elections office, Governors office and attorney general have clearly shown from their positions that the candidates are standing in the election.

    It is a shame that sitting ministers arrogantly ignored the elections law and refused to declare their interests as requried under the elections law. This is worst than not declaring Govt contracts. Yet there is no possible sanction for this.

    These situations have shown that the current constituition and draft as proposed can disenfranchise the voters and this should not be allowed to occur.

     

    • Just the facts says:

      "It is a shame that sitting ministers arrogantly ignored the elections law and refused to declare their interests as requried under the elections law".

      There is no reason to believe that the individuals concerned were behaving arrogantly or were deliberately refusing to declare their interests.  

  24. Lack of Integrity says:

    Mark and Joke Joke will NEVER be forgiven for putting this country thru all of this drama. They have lost my vote now and forever more.

    • Anonymous says:

      For the Person who’s Statement is Mark and Joke Joke. This is to you WHO CARES  1 vote less 1 worry less.

  25. B T FINEST says:

    I heard on the Rooster debate this morning from Mr Dwayne Symour, that Mr Arden McLean, Kurt Tibbetts, Alden McLaughlin or Charles Clifford either one of them submitted their interest late too.  So whats up with that?  for him to say this publically their must some proof.  And i remind you they are all sitting Ministers. 

     

    The bottom line is we in Bodden Town and i speak for most of the young youth from Breakers to Savannah PPM not going make it back in if we can help it.

    MARK SCOTLAND & DWAYNE  SEYMOUR come May 21st 2009 we celebrating

     

    UDP VOTE 8 & 9 and leave the rest behind

    A BETTER WAY FOWARD

     

    Sincerely,

    One of BT’S Finest

    • Anonymous says:

      For your information Dwayne Seymour (Joke Joke) did not mention Charles Clifford’s name on the radio this morning.  He only mentioned Kurt Tibbetts and Alden McLaughlin.  You should listen more carefully next time!  Or maybe you did but you are just trying to pull Charles Clifford into this mess too!  Sorry, the persons who did not abide by the Constitution are  MARK SCOTLAND AND DWAYNE SEYMOUR.  They cannot blame anyone else but themselves. 

  26. Lack of Integrity says:

    The matter is clear that these 2 should not be running but as it’s in the consitution only the courts have jurisdiction over the matter.

    The governor is trying to say as best as he can that the UDP and these 1 candidates really need to stop lying that they have the support of the AG and the Elections Office to run.

  27. BTowner says:

    So pray tell how are these two going to be able to swear to uphold a constitution that they have not even read and are clearly not familiar with……what a bunch of loonies……I listen to them on Rooster and during the Chamber forums……all of the UDP Candidates have been reading from the same script. You see how when they are aked a question that they dont have the script for that they are completely lost….like "Alice in Wonderland" Lol.

  28. Richard Wadd says:

     Dear ‘Anonymous’, This is not a matter of PPM or UDP, nor is it a matter of literacy. This is a matter of LAW.

    The days of Piracy and Lawlessness in these islands are LONG GONE, and whether or not we like Scotland & Seymour, they have failed to comply with a Costitutional Law of this land. No Court can, or will ever change that.

    The issue is WHY are we to be made to bear the Cost of the Courts? The Law is Finite in this application. If THE CANDIDATES wish to challenge it, then let them do so AT THIER COST, not mine!

    Yes, people make mistakes, but when they do THEY pay for them, not you or I.

     

     

  29. Anonymous says:

    The Courts are there to decide Grey areas – where the answer is not obvious and there is a genuine dispute as to meaning. No one disputes what the constitution says on this issue. It is an abuse, and tremendous waste of money,  to require the Courts to determine this after the fact – and exposes the whole country to turmoil. This is not Good Governance Mr. Jack. Do your Job – don’t palm it off to a judge when the horse has already left the stable.

  30. Anonymous says:

    Too bad Mr Jack did not exercise such restraint in the past

  31. Richard Wadd says:

     Frankly, ‘Jack’ lacks the ability to ‘give free beer alcoholics’! Why does no-one seem to have the ‘Coconuts’ to deal with this matter as the CONSTITUTIONAL LAW so plainly outlines?? 

    Just like our useless AG, he would rather let US bear the cost of carring this to the Courts, instead of letting the CANDIDATES challenge their dis-qualification.

    Why should we be made to bear the Cost of their failure to comply with the Constitution?

    Talk about ‘ass backwards’ !!

  32. Anonymous says:

    Why then do we have laws in place and they are never enforced.  This seems like a common practice on every law passed in the Cayman Islands.  You can’t have it both ways

  33. Anonymous says:




    How sad is this. We have two candidates (or more) that cannot follow the rules of a document that they want to be elected and to be sworn to uphold. It is also too bad that none of the officials that should be making the decision, namely The Governor, Attorney General, and elections office, don’t have the balls to stand up and say you are ineligible. So, it will now cost the country even more money (Which we don’t have) to host a bye election in Bodden Town after the courts rule they are ineligible. Have we learned nothing from the Henderson / Met Team fiasco? Someone, please step up and make a decision about this before the elections so we don’t have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars more after the fact!

     

    • Just the facts says:

      "Someone, please step up and make a decision about this before the elections so we don’t have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars more after the fact!"

      Any costs of a bye-election should be borne by the candidates who were in default.

  34. BT Voter says:

    I’m really disappointed that Mark and John John would put the people of Bodden Town in this predicament. They should do the honourable thing and withdraw their candidacy. I was considering voting for Chuckie, Mark and Tony but will not be voting for Mark now because of his lack of respect for our laws and the constitution…..I guessmy third vote will go to Ossie or Theresa……no final decision on that yet.

  35. Anonymous says:

    PPM

    Please give it up; the matter is now clear for all who can understand english:

    The UDP candidates in BT can run, and the people will decide if they are to be elected.

    IF some bitter person wants to challenge their election, then ‘that will be a matter for the Courts to decide’.