Wat­son Duke is the pres­i­dent of the PSA and no gen­er­al coun­cil has the right to con­vene a sep­a­rate meet­ing with the sole in­ten­tion of re­mov­ing the pres­i­dent. If that right is be­stowed up­on it, then the or­gan­i­sa­tion has a very jokey con­sti­tu­tion. How come 10 peo­ple or less can stage a coup, ap­point them­selves in­to po­si­tions and then use those po­si­tions to judge the per­son who they have re­moved? This is def­i­nite­ly a clique of plen­ty noise mak­ers. The prop­er pro­ce­dure should have been fol­lowed, which is to move a mo­tion of no con­fi­dence in Duke and get that mo­tion sec­ond­ed. The mo­tion is then put to the floor and if there is a ma­jor­i­ty sup­port­ing it, then the mo­tion stands. That mo­tion will then be de­bat­ed and vot­ed up­on.

The bur­den is on the mover of the mo­tion to pro­vide all facts of the al­le­ga­tions. Duke has noth­ing to an­swer to, un­til the mover of the mo­tion can sup­ply all in­for­ma­tion of the al­le­ga­tions to Duke and hence­forth prove it be­yond all doubt. If the clique mem­bers are strangers to the above pro­ce­dure, then Duke will be in a kan­ga­roo court where the out­come has al­ready been de­ter­mined. By the way, they should be re­mind­ed that Duke is en­ti­tled to have le­gal rep­re­sen­ta­tion at that spe­cial gen­er­al coun­cil meet­ing and to al­so walk with his band of "ob­servers." My ad­vise to Duke is to take them to court and make them pay.

Am­ral Ho­sein

War­renville