If the authors of the Guyana Constitution felt that 106(6) required "immediate" resignation by the Gov't, the first 3 words of 106(7) would read "notwithstanding its resignation" rather than "notwithstanding its defeat."
Let me further amplify:
The practicalities of political life in a Constituency System govern the normative conduct of the losing side in a NC vote . . . because they are no longer a majority, the losers cannot pass any spending bills and require the cooperation of the new majority to govern as a lame duck.
NONE of these practicalities exist with the List System we have in Guyana. But these are the inapplicable 'precedents' and customs we will be force fed in the coming weeks by disinformation agents plying their trade for high stakes.
In fact, Charandaas Persaud was expelled and legally replaced by the Coalition, reconstituting its majority (something that could not happen with directly elected MP's).
Parliament, after all, has NOT been dissolved.
Clearly, Mr. Persaud's clinching INDIVIDUAL vote is a problem since he was not an eligible member of the Legislature.
The will of the people in our system reposes in the Parties and the President who face the electorate . . . not individuals who don't.
Ironic in that the only thing "anachronistic" in all this is that we allow individuals to cross the floor.
But that's the letter of the law as they say, and we have to honor that . . . because it's the LAW
Those shouting loudest for resign NOW should ponder the implications.
