Govt seeks legal opinions on no-confidence motion

Posted by: Denis Chabrol in News, Politics December 24, 2018 19 Comments

The Ministry of the Presidency.

The Guyana government on Monday announced that it has sought legal opinions on the implications of the defeat its suffered in the National Assembly in the opposition-sponsored no-confidence motion.

In a statement issued by the Minister of State, Joseph Harmon, he said a special Cabinet meeting “examined all of the legal and constitutional aspects of the vote in the National Assembly on Friday, December 21st and established a Sub-Committee to advise on this matter.”

“The Sub-Committee will examine all the legal opinions available and report to Cabinet on Thursday, December 27th with recommendations on the way forward,” he said.

The constitution clearly states that after a confidence motion is passed by a majority of members, the President and Cabinet must resign and elections must be held in 90 days unless otherwise decided by a two-thirds majority of the National Assembly.

Earlier Monday, Attorney General Basil Williams said Guyanese Senior Counsel, Rex Mc Kay has been hired to examine implications. “We have been looking at a variety of options. Mr Mc Kay is part of the process and we are not leave any stone unturned but also we have to be geared for an election and so we have to address our minds to that,” Williams told Demerara Waves Online News.

Barbadian lawyers, Ralph Thorne and Hal Gallop are also said to be part of the legal team that is examining the implications of the motion that was passed by a 33-32 majority after backbencher, Charrandass Persaud voted with the opposition People’s Progressive Party (PPP).

Who are they kidding?  Granger is so happy to get out of that Presidency, he would hand over the govt to Mutt and Jeff if he had a chance.

Of course, what yuh expect? Dem man will look at all legal means. When de legal means run out, den GT goh bun and de military go step in. It is a fight foh economic resource...coolie vs blackman. Yuh tink dem would a tek it without wan challenge? Jagan bun cane and do what he had to do. Every strategy gat different response. Ayoo didnt write dem down pon de blackboard in Freedom House? Hey hey hey...

Nonsense.  Then their "Majority" was also not a "Majority!"

If it requires one more, then you are saying they needed an advantage of 3 as 2 is not a viable number with 65!

Thanks to Ralph Ramkarran, Hughs got wild ideas!

Baseman posted:

Nonsense.  Then their "Majority" was also not a "Majority!"

If it requires one more, then you are saying they needed an advantage of 3 as 2 is not a viable number with 65!

Thanks to Ralph Ramkarran, Hughs got wild ideas!

Bai...dem bais mekkin a case foh de court foh postpone de eleckshun. That is de bess strategy dem gat now foh get dem teeth pon de aile. If dat fail den is time foh de non court strategy. Hey hey hey...

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Who are they kidding?  Granger is so happy to get out of that Presidency, he would hand over the govt to Mutt and Jeff if he had a chance.

If you notice, Granger ain't doing nuttin'.  Is dem odda people fitin' fuh powah!  It ain't about Granger!

Labba posted:

Baseman posted:

Nonsense.  Then their "Majority" was also not a "Majority!"

If it requires one more, then you are saying they needed an advantage of 3 as 2 is not a viable number with 65!

Thanks to Ralph Ramkarran, Hughs got wild ideas!

Bai...dem bais mekkin a case foh de court foh postpone de eleckshun. That is de bess strategy dem gat now foh get dem teeth pon de aile. If dat fail den is time foh de non court strategy. Hey hey hey...

They are caught off-guard and in disarray and playing for time!  The LGE proves the PPP is ready and mobilized!

Baseman posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Who are they kidding?  Granger is so happy to get out of that Presidency, he would hand over the govt to Mutt and Jeff if he had a chance.

If you notice, Granger ain't doing nuttin'.  Is dem odda people fitin' fuh powah!  It ain't about Granger!

Yea...Granger fightin foh he life. Is blackman vs coolie. Nobady aint yet see that is better to get half de aile money than none aile money. Hey hey hey...

32.5 is half of 65. Coalition got .5 vote less than that and PPP got .5 vote more than that. PPP advantage over the Coalition is exactly 1 point. Case closed. Next move. PNC begins their mo fiah slo fiah campaign.

Baseman posted:

Labba posted:

Baseman posted:

Nonsense.  Then their "Majority" was also not a "Majority!"

If it requires one more, then you are saying they needed an advantage of 3 as 2 is not a viable number with 65!

Thanks to Ralph Ramkarran, Hughs got wild ideas!

Bai...dem bais mekkin a case foh de court foh postpone de eleckshun. That is de bess strategy dem gat now foh get dem teeth pon de aile. If dat fail den is time foh de non court strategy. Hey hey hey...

They are caught off-guard and in disarray and playing for time!  The LGE proves the PPP is ready and mobilized!

Nat really. PPP miscalculate now too. Blackman who was going to stay home in 2020 comin out now. Yuh going to get de highest blackman turn out. And dem army bais in de GECOM goh pad am up bout 1 percent point. Dem need high turn out and 1 percent point rig. Dem cyant rig big and crude like lang time...hey hey hey. Bharrat mobilize de blackman foh de PNC...hey hey hey. Every strategy gat multiple response. Hey hey hey...dem hustle business round BJ won't get dis. Hey hey hey...

ksazma posted:

32.5 is half of 65. Coalition got .5 vote less than that and PPP got .5 vote more than that. PPP advantage over the Coalition is exactly 1 point. Case closed. Next move. PNC begins their mo fiah slo fiah campaign.

They getting technical!

ksazma posted:

32.5 is half of 65. Coalition got .5 vote less than that and PPP got .5 vote more than that. PPP advantage over the Coalition is exactly 1 point. Case closed. Next move. PNC begins their mo fiah slo fiah campaign.

So if the PPP would get 32.5, then the PNC would get 32.5. A tie? Which half of Charandas does the PNC take and which half do they want to give the PPP? Is the top half more powerful than the bottom half or they split in the middle? PNC mentality. As the perennial bullies in Guyana, they will resort to violence to retain power. The military might be called in. Wonder why Granger is quiet? His time is all occupied with members of the military on seizing power.

Labba posted:

Baseman posted:

Labba posted:

Baseman posted:

Nonsense.  Then their "Majority" was also not a "Majority!"

If it requires one more, then you are saying they needed an advantage of 3 as 2 is not a viable number with 65!

Thanks to Ralph Ramkarran, Hughs got wild ideas!

Bai...dem bais mekkin a case foh de court foh postpone de eleckshun. That is de bess strategy dem gat now foh get dem teeth pon de aile. If dat fail den is time foh de non court strategy. Hey hey hey...

They are caught off-guard and in disarray and playing for time!  The LGE proves the PPP is ready and mobilized!

Nat really. PPP miscalculate now too. Blackman who was going to stay home in 2020 comin out now. Yuh going to get de highest blackman turn out. And dem army bais in de GECOM goh pad am up bout 1 percent point. Dem need high turn out and 1 percent point rig. Dem cyant rig big and crude like lang time...hey hey hey. Bharrat mobilize de blackman foh de PNC...hey hey hey. Every strategy gat multiple response. Hey hey hey...dem hustle business round BJ won't get dis. Hey hey hey...

I actually agree with you.  They may feel disappointed with the PNC, but they will be mobilized to turn out as they view it as a back stab, a coolie man bring down a Black Govt.  It may have divided Guyana even further!

BJ may be no genius but so far, he has been a gazillion steps ahead of this hapless Coalition government. Compare Hughes comments and Nandlall's pointed rebuttal. They are night and day. So concise was Nandlall's rebuttal that Ramkarran was forced to correct his erroneous statement. 

Baseman posted:

Labba posted:

Baseman posted:

Labba posted:

Baseman posted:

Nonsense.  Then their "Majority" was also not a "Majority!"

If it requires one more, then you are saying they needed an advantage of 3 as 2 is not a viable number with 65!

Thanks to Ralph Ramkarran, Hughs got wild ideas!

Bai...dem bais mekkin a case foh de court foh postpone de eleckshun. That is de bess strategy dem gat now foh get dem teeth pon de aile. If dat fail den is time foh de non court strategy. Hey hey hey...

They are caught off-guard and in disarray and playing for time!  The LGE proves the PPP is ready and mobilized!

Nat really. PPP miscalculate now too. Blackman who was going to stay home in 2020 comin out now. Yuh going to get de highest blackman turn out. And dem army bais in de GECOM goh pad am up bout 1 percent point. Dem need high turn out and 1 percent point rig. Dem cyant rig big and crude like lang time...hey hey hey. Bharrat mobilize de blackman foh de PNC...hey hey hey. Every strategy gat multiple response. Hey hey hey...dem hustle business round BJ won't get dis. Hey hey hey...

I actually agree with you.  They may feel disappointed with the PNC, but they will be mobilized to turn out as they view it as a back stab, a coolie man bring down a Black Govt.  It may have divided Guyana even further!

Yeah. De people seh how coolie tryin foh tek away we aile money. Hey hey hey...

skeldon_man posted:

ksazma posted:

32.5 is half of 65. Coalition got .5 vote less than that and PPP got .5 vote more than that. PPP advantage over the Coalition is exactly 1 point. Case closed. Next move. PNC begins their mo fiah slo fiah campaign.

So if the PPP would get 32.5, then the PNC would get 32.5. A tie? Which half of Charandas does the PNC take and which half do they want to give the PPP? .

That's not what they are saying.  They are saying the number to beat was 32.5 and PPP got 33 which is not a 1 advantage.  It doesn't hold water.  It's a technical argument!  The one advantage is over the other, not over an imaginary "other."

Baseman posted:

Labba posted:

Baseman posted:

Labba posted:

Baseman posted:

Nonsense.  Then their "Majority" was also not a "Majority!"

If it requires one more, then you are saying they needed an advantage of 3 as 2 is not a viable number with 65!

Thanks to Ralph Ramkarran, Hughs got wild ideas!

Bai...dem bais mekkin a case foh de court foh postpone de eleckshun. That is de bess strategy dem gat now foh get dem teeth pon de aile. If dat fail den is time foh de non court strategy. Hey hey hey...

They are caught off-guard and in disarray and playing for time!  The LGE proves the PPP is ready and mobilized!

Nat really. PPP miscalculate now too. Blackman who was going to stay home in 2020 comin out now. Yuh going to get de highest blackman turn out. And dem army bais in de GECOM goh pad am up bout 1 percent point. Dem need high turn out and 1 percent point rig. Dem cyant rig big and crude like lang time...hey hey hey. Bharrat mobilize de blackman foh de PNC...hey hey hey. Every strategy gat multiple response. Hey hey hey...dem hustle business round BJ won't get dis. Hey hey hey...

I actually agree with you.  They may feel disappointed with the PNC, but they will be mobilized to turn out as they view it as a back stab, a coolie man bring down a Black Govt.  It may have divided Guyana even further!

Bai, I see dem black man hugging Bharat. But come election time, I know they going for the broom. Hope they vote their stomachs and not their eyes.

Baseman posted:

Nonsense.  Then their "Majority" was also not a "Majority!"

If it requires one more, then you are saying they needed an advantage of 3 as 2 is not a viable number with 65!

Thanks to Ralph Ramkarran, Hughs got wild ideas!

Majority of the entire membership

A majority of the entire membership is a voting basis that requires that more than half of all the members of a body (including those absent and those present but not voting) vote in favor of a proposition in order for it to be passed.In practical terms, it means an absence or an abstention from voting is equivalent to a "no" vote.It may be contrasted with a majority vote which only requires more than half of those actually voting to approve a proposition for it to be enacted. An absolute majority may also be the same as a majority of the entire membership, although this usage is not consistent.

In addition, a supermajority could be specified in this voting basis, such as a vote of "two-thirds of the entire membership".

By way of illustration, in February 2007 the Italian Government fell after it won a vote in the Italian Senate by 158 votes to 136 (with 24 abstentions). The government needed an absolute majority in the 318 member house but fell two votes short of the required 160 when two of its own supporters abstained.

Take a look at the above, the question is what is half of 65 , and what number is majority.

Baseman posted:

Labba posted:

Baseman posted:

Labba posted:

Baseman posted:

Nonsense.  Then their "Majority" was also not a "Majority!"

If it requires one more, then you are saying they needed an advantage of 3 as 2 is not a viable number with 65!

Thanks to Ralph Ramkarran, Hughs got wild ideas!

Bai...dem bais mekkin a case foh de court foh postpone de eleckshun. That is de bess strategy dem gat now foh get dem teeth pon de aile. If dat fail den is time foh de non court strategy. Hey hey hey...

They are caught off-guard and in disarray and playing for time!  The LGE proves the PPP is ready and mobilized!

Nat really. PPP miscalculate now too. Blackman who was going to stay home in 2020 comin out now. Yuh going to get de highest blackman turn out. And dem army bais in de GECOM goh pad am up bout 1 percent point. Dem need high turn out and 1 percent point rig. Dem cyant rig big and crude like lang time...hey hey hey. Bharrat mobilize de blackman foh de PNC...hey hey hey. Every strategy gat multiple response. Hey hey hey...dem hustle business round BJ won't get dis. Hey hey hey...

I actually agree with you.  They may feel disappointed with the PNC, but they will be mobilized to turn out as they view it as a back stab, a coolie man bring down a Black Govt.

Then they will deserve the hapless government that they get.

Baseman posted:

skeldon_man posted:

ksazma posted:

32.5 is half of 65. Coalition got .5 vote less than that and PPP got .5 vote more than that. PPP advantage over the Coalition is exactly 1 point. Case closed. Next move. PNC begins their mo fiah slo fiah campaign.

So if the PPP would get 32.5, then the PNC would get 32.5. A tie? Which half of Charandas does the PNC take and which half do they want to give the PPP? .

That's not what they are saying.  They are saying the number to beat was 32.5 and PPP got 33 which is not a 1 advantage.  It doesn't hold water.  It's a technical argument!  The one advantage is over the other, not over an imaginary "other."

Just making fun of the man's logic.

So we clutching at straws now Django bhai? Actually, I don't think that the Coalition government will fight this in court. I think they prefer the slo fiah mo fiah strategy.

This dude is seeking to advise the Coalition government.

https://www.facebook.com/runru...3729?hc_location=ufi

Can we say, all the bills passed in Parliament by APNU -AFC majority 1 vote is null and void.

Django posted:

Baseman posted:

Nonsense.  Then their "Majority" was also not a "Majority!"

If it requires one more, then you are saying they needed an advantage of 3 as 2 is not a viable number with 65!

Thanks to Ralph Ramkarran, Hughs got wild ideas!

Majority of the entire membership

A majority of the entire membership is a voting basis that requires that more than half of all the members of a body (including those absent and those present but not voting) vote in favor of a proposition in order for it to be passed.In practical terms, it means an absence or an abstention from voting is equivalent to a "no" vote.It may be contrasted with a majority vote which only requires more than half of those actually voting to approve a proposition for it to be enacted. An absolute majority may also be the same as a majority of the entire membership, although this usage is not consistent.

In addition, a supermajority could be specified in this voting basis, such as a vote of "two-thirds of the entire membership".

By way of illustration, in February 2007 the Italian Government fell after it won a vote in the Italian Senate by 158 votes to 136 (with 24 abstentions). The government needed an absolute majority in the 318 member house but fell two votes short of the required 160 when two of its own supporters abstained.

---

 

Take a look at the above, the question is what is half of 65 , and what number is majority.

Boy, that so stupid.  Then why even have an odd number if .5 will become a factor.  Alyuh deh pon sheer stupidness!  They needed 160 because 159 was exactly 50% and not a majority!  Same with Vanuatu, they are 56.  Any even number will, by default, means 2 for a majority.

Alyuh prapa stretching it to justify Slo Faiya Mo Faiya campaign!

Those dogs will try every trick on the planet. bloody stinking thieves!!!

Baseman posted:

Django posted:

Baseman posted:

Nonsense.  Then their "Majority" was also not a "Majority!"

If it requires one more, then you are saying they needed an advantage of 3 as 2 is not a viable number with 65!

Thanks to Ralph Ramkarran, Hughs got wild ideas!

Majority of the entire membership

A majority of the entire membership is a voting basis that requires that more than half of all the members of a body (including those absent and those present but not voting) vote in favor of a proposition in order for it to be passed.In practical terms, it means an absence or an abstention from voting is equivalent to a "no" vote.It may be contrasted with a majority vote which only requires more than half of those actually voting to approve a proposition for it to be enacted. An absolute majority may also be the same as a majority of the entire membership, although this usage is not consistent.

In addition, a supermajority could be specified in this voting basis, such as a vote of "two-thirds of the entire membership".

By way of illustration, in February 2007 the Italian Government fell after it won a vote in the Italian Senate by 158 votes to 136 (with 24 abstentions). The government needed an absolute majority in the 318 member house but fell two votes short of the required 160 when two of its own supporters abstained.

---

 

Take a look at the above, the question is what is half of 65 , and what number is majority.

Boy, that so stupid.  Then why even have an odd number if .5 will become a factor.  Alyuh deh pon sheer stupidness!  They needed 160 because 159 was exactly 50% and not a majority!  Same with Vanuatu, they are 56.  Any even number will, by default, means 2 for a majority.

Alyuh prapa stretching it to justify Slo Faiya Mo Faiya campaign!

The bai wants a super majority...2/3 as a majority.

Dave posted:

Can we say, all the bills passed in Parliament by APNU -AFC majority 1 vote is null and void.

Dave posted:

Can we say, all the bills passed in Parliament by APNU -AFC majority 1 vote is null and void.

It would be using the Coalition's warped argument. But none ah dah matta anymore. De government itself is now null and void.

Kasz, the "genius" Basil will come up with a beauty of an argument.

skeldon_man posted:

Baseman posted:

 

Boy, that so stupid.  Then why even have an odd number if .5 will become a factor.  Alyuh deh pon sheer stupidness!  They needed 160 because 159 was exactly 50% and not a majority!  Same with Vanuatu, they are 56.  Any even number will, by default, means 2 for a majority.

Alyuh prapa stretching it to justify Slo Faiya Mo Faiya campaign!

The bai wants a super majority...2/3 as a majority.

It was amusing that they were expecting folks from the PPP side to vote with them. Actually I am surprised that they expected the AFC dudes to vote with them. Not only did they undermine the PPP since 2011 (maybe since 1992) but they have also undermined the AFC since 2015.

These cheating, liars called PNC, the British who invented the System says the Govt FALL but these thieves trying to tell the world otherwise!!!

Nehru posted:

Kasz, the "genius" Basil will come up with a beauty of an argument.

Williams ramblings on Friday was disgraceful. 

ksazma posted:

skeldon_man posted:

Baseman posted:

 

Boy, that so stupid.  Then why even have an odd number if .5 will become a factor.  Alyuh deh pon sheer stupidness!  They needed 160 because 159 was exactly 50% and not a majority!  Same with Vanuatu, they are 56.  Any even number will, by default, means 2 for a majority.

Alyuh prapa stretching it to justify Slo Faiya Mo Faiya campaign!

The bai wants a super majority...2/3 as a majority.

It was amusing that they were expecting folks from the PPP side to vote with them. Actually I am surprised that they expected the AFC dudes to vote with them. Not only did they undermine the PPP since 2011 (maybe since 1992) but they have also undermined the AFC since 2015.

Undermining is a trademark Burnham left with the PNC. Just ask the UF and now the AFC. Any mushroom party that thinks it will have power or influence on the PNC has an idiot and moron for its leader.

With leaders like Basil Guyana going places: TO HELL and turn to a SHITHOLE

Suh Hammie OE award and pension package is null and void? 

Dave posted:

Can we say, all the bills passed in Parliament by APNU -AFC majority 1 vote is null and void.

If Nigel logic is used.

ksazma posted:

skeldon_man posted:

Baseman posted:

 

Boy, that so stupid.  Then why even have an odd number if .5 will become a factor.  Alyuh deh pon sheer stupidness!  They needed 160 because 159 was exactly 50% and not a majority!  Same with Vanuatu, they are 56.  Any even number will, by default, means 2 for a majority.

Alyuh prapa stretching it to justify Slo Faiya Mo Faiya campaign!

The bai wants a super majority...2/3 as a majority.

It was amusing that they were expecting folks from the PPP side to vote with them. Actually I am surprised that they expected the AFC dudes to vote with them. Not only did they undermine the PPP since 2011 (maybe since 1992) but they have also undermined the AFC since 2015.

Imagine, Caribj boasted that Trotman worked with Granger to undermine Nagamootoo in the AFC and they have the gall to call Charandas a traitor!!

If Charandas got a million and ran, good for him.  Tief tief from tief mek gawd laff!  AFC had become a pawn for the PNC and Charandas checkmated them!

Baseman posted:

Django posted:

Baseman posted:

Nonsense.  Then their "Majority" was also not a "Majority!"

If it requires one more, then you are saying they needed an advantage of 3 as 2 is not a viable number with 65!

Thanks to Ralph Ramkarran, Hughs got wild ideas!

Majority of the entire membership

A majority of the entire membership is a voting basis that requires that more than half of all the members of a body (including those absent and those present but not voting) vote in favor of a proposition in order for it to be passed.In practical terms, it means an absence or an abstention from voting is equivalent to a "no" vote.It may be contrasted with a majority vote which only requires more than half of those actually voting to approve a proposition for it to be enacted. An absolute majority may also be the same as a majority of the entire membership, although this usage is not consistent.

In addition, a supermajority could be specified in this voting basis, such as a vote of "two-thirds of the entire membership".

By way of illustration, in February 2007 the Italian Government fell after it won a vote in the Italian Senate by 158 votes to 136 (with 24 abstentions). The government needed an absolute majority in the 318 member house but fell two votes short of the required 160 when two of its own supporters abstained.

---

 

Take a look at the above, the question is what is half of 65 , and what number is majority.

Boy, that so stupid.  Then why even have an odd number if .5 will become a factor.  Alyuh deh pon sheer stupidness!  They needed 160 because 159 was exactly 50% and not a majority!  Same with Vanuatu, they are 56.  Any even number will, by default, means 2 for a majority.

Alyuh prapa stretching it to justify Slo Faiya Mo Faiya campaign!

Banna, i am not disputing, just present to see what posters think.

Nehru posted:

With leaders like Basil Guyana going places: TO HELL and turn to a SHITHOLE

Basil can't be leader. Lawrence wouldn't allow it.