Former St. Kitts Government Minister, Dr. Timothy S. Harris. Photo: progressnotpromises.com

Harris spoke to the media on February 28, 2013 just moments after the judgment was read by His Lordship Justice John Benjamin.

“The judgment - as I understand it - declared that all the actions of Dr. Douglas were null and void and, in that regard, I see it as a victory for the people, not a victory for the MPs that took the legal action but a victory for the people. Because it reinforces that the people’s voice, the elected voice of the people, is what the Parliament is about.

“And we thank God today for that victory that we continue to push ahead. Because it is clear – again – that Dr. Douglas was on the wrong side of law, wrong side of history and the wrong side with regard to the fundamental views of the people. The majority of the people in St. Kitts and Nevis continue to believe that Dr. Douglas is out of ideas and is no longer responsive to their needs.”

Dr. Harris – Parliamentary Representative for the St. Christopher Seven – expressed his view that the judgment is further evidence that the Prime Minister’s approach to governance is ineffective.

“The approach that we had taken was – by and large – (that) the approach of Dr. Douglas was one that was wrong, that the Parliament was a place in which the elected people voices must be heard. They are the representatives of the people.

“It is a message that Dr. Douglas has lost course! Dr. Douglas now needs to do the honourable thing...resign or call the general elections. Let the people – the supreme agents in a democracy – decide the future of the country.

“…that is how we view the decision; a continued vindication that the agenda and the approach of Dr. Douglas to government and to governance is wrong. It is time for Douglas to go.”

Background

The motion was filed by Members of Parliament the Hon. Shawn Richards and the Hon. Sam Condor on February 1, 2013, just days after the Senators (Increasing of Number) 2012 Bill was passed on an 8-7 vote.

The deciding vote was that of Hamilton – who was sworn-in as a Senator just hours before the Bill was passed. And according to Condor’s and Richards, the process of Hamilton’s appointment was illegal and consequently the passage of the Bill, too, was illegal.

This gave rise to the legal action which they took.