By Dionne Jackson Miller
The question of whether Parliament passed the Constitutional Amendment Act raising the retirement age of the Director of Public Prosecutions and Auditor General for an improper purpose, was one of the major areas of focus in the Court of Appeal on Thursday.
It was the fourth day of the appeal hearing.
King's Counsel Ransford Braham, on behalf of the government, insisted that the question of improper purpose has no place in this case.
He was responding to arguments from King's Counsel Michael Hylton that Parliament had passed the Act for an improper purpose. He said that was to extend the tenure of DPP Paula Llewellyn so she would not have to leave office when her extension of tenure ended in September 2023.
But Mr. Braham said Mr. Hylton is trying to add another tier to the constitutional amendment process.
Mr. Braham also argued that the court has no authority to strike down a law as having been passed for an improper purpose, unless the Constitution has been breached.
In any event, Mr. Braham argued that even if the law had been passed to benefit Ms. Llewellyn, that wouldn't make it improper as Parliament has always passed private bills to benefit individuals and private entities.
.jpg)
All feeds
