News, Top Story

Chastanet Issues Legal Challenge Against Privileges Committee

Opposition Leader and Micoud South parliamentary representative Allen Chastanet
Opposition Leader and Micoud South parliamentary representative Allen Chastanet

Opposition Leader and Micoud South parliamentary representative Allen Chastanet is taking legal action in the impending matter of a ‘Referral of Complaints’ lodged against him by the Privileges Committee.

But the Chairperson of that Committee, House Speaker Claudius Francis is unperturbed by Chastanet’s action stating that parliament will issue a statement “in due time.”

According to the legal representatives for Chastanet, their client was never “formally notified or advised” of the specific charges or complaints leveled against him, and neither did Francis, as Speaker of the Lower House of Assembly, specify the validity of the complaints.

Chastanet’s legal representatives further claimed that no motion relating to any alleged matter of privilege was tabled in the house for the referral of complaints and the house “never debated or decided on” whether the “as- yet –unspecified complaints” should be referred to the committee.

“We have reviewed the relevant law, practice and Standing Orders regulating the practice and procedures of the House and Standing Committee generally, including the authoritative guide on Parliamentary procedure,” said the Leader of the Opposition lawyers.

Based on its research, the legal team argued, “we have advised our client that the said complaints against him have not been lawfully referred to the Committee and that, in any event, basic principles of procedural fairness, natural justice and due process have not been adhered to in connection with the impugned referrals.”

Chastanet’s lawyers stated that their client’s legal rights have been violated.

Outlining one of the components pertaining to the nature of house procedures, Chastanet’s counsel proposed that the guidance suggests that “in general the House should exercise its penal jurisdiction (i) in any event as sparingly as possible and (ii) only when satisfied to do so was essential in order to provide reasonable protection for the House , its Members or its officers from improper obstruction or attempt at or threat of obstruction, causing , or likely to cause, substantial interference with the performance of their respective functions”.

The attorneys further stated that the procedure is designed to prevent frivolous complaints of breach of privilege. It notes that there are safeguards in place such as:

The Committee of Privileges does not have the power to inquire at will but can only deal with complaints that are referred to it.

Decisions as to whether to refer a matter of privilege to the Committee of Privileges are taken by the House as a whole

And Members require the permission of the Speaker to raise a matter privilege.

Francis not only declined to comment on the referral of complaints brought against Chastanet but instead stated that, the parliament’s “legal team” representatives will issue a statement on the matter, in due time.

He also referred to a former High Court judgment, which ruled that the court had no legal authority to deal with matters of parliament. In addition, the high court judgment further states that parliament functions independently from the judiciary and the parliament is responsible for settling its internal affairs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Send this to a friend