caribny posted:Demerara_Guy posted:Major parts of the constitution require as a minimum sixty six percent of the MPs in parliament.
This being the PPP excuse. Well sit down and take Granger's choice now because he is NOT in violation of the constitution. All he needs to say is " I don't like the 18 selected" and he has satisfied the constitution. He is NOT obligated to chose from this if they don't meet his satisfaction.
The Carter arrangement set in place a mechanism where the president would chose from a list provided by the opposition, but this isn't baked into the constitution so isn't illegal.
So continue to make excuses for retaining the Burnham constitution.
1. Perhaps, you need to become conversant with the Guyana constitution.
2. Granger is in absolute violation of the constitution since he unilaterally elected the Chairman of GECOM.
3. The constitution does not give a president the authority say; "I do not like the listed candidates"; reject a list of nominees and then appoint unilaterally a GECOM chairman.
4. And regarding the constitution, study it again on the requirements for making those important changes. It requires, as a minimum, two-thirds of support of the MPs in parliament.
5. The provision were made by Burnham when he; miraculously; got more than two thirds of the MPs elected for his party.
6. Currently, PPP/C and PNCR/AFC has 52 and 53 seats respectively.