Totaram
<style="color:#000066;">Well these legal rulings are complicated and the average person doesn't always understand them. And when I don't understand them I ask people who do to explain. But you see the problem with political matters is that they are rarely if ever solved by legal proceedings . In any case the current matter on which the CJ ruled is a political matter and courts don't like to get involved.Anyway I have another source of wisdom to whom I take these kids of matters. Some people like to ask :What would Jesus do? etc. etc. Well the wise one who is my source of wisdom is my mother. She went to Lord Krishna a long time ago but I have imaginary conversations with her. So today I had a talk with her about the CJ's ruling. I mentioned to her the facts of the case and she said bai dem still a fight a Guyana. Anyway she explained de way she saw things. She said it is like if you go a Uncle Harry store an yo buy one drinks an cake and pay wid one dalla. Uncle Harry charge you 65 cents and throw you change pan de counter. You vex and pick up you change an go home and complain to you daady that the change wrang . My mother explained that you think the change wrang , Uncle Harry think it right . So you go to a pandit to help wid the matter. He hear the matter and say is uncle harry shap and he can tell yu wa you change is but e prapa rude. You must go bak and tell e that he suppose to han you back you change in you han. OK me go go back an wa happen if e han me 35 cents in me hand and me still think the change wrang. Well the pandit say that da would be a matter fo a swami. Me mumma na go a scool but she smaat mo than dem PPP people. Mr. Boston understands the ruling and was only feigning disappointment.
Rulings are seldom outside the comprehension of the plaintiff and defendant else they would not be elated or aggrieved by the outcome.
This is counting votes in an election - a proper count that is - it is not a political matter but a matter of grave importance - conservation of the sovereignty of the individual. It is the basis on which individuals electors transfer rights to an agency to act on their behalf and fundamental to democracy.
I am quite sure your mom did not explain it that way. Any ot her way would be puzzling and one would wonder if she was given to drink or you were hence this confused retelling.