Akash Sama­roo

Se­nior Re­porter

akash.sama­roo@guardian.co.tt

The Mu­nic­i­pal Cor­po­ra­tions (Ex­ten­sion of Terms of Of­fice and Val­i­da­tion) Bill, 2023, will now head to the Sen­ate af­ter be­ing passed in the House of Rep­re­sen­ta­tives with­out ob­jec­tions from the Op­po­si­tion yes­ter­day.

This bill seeks to val­i­date the work of those coun­cil­lors and al­der­men whose terms of of­fice ex­pired in De­cem­ber 2022 but con­tin­ued in of­fice un­til May 18, 2023. It al­so seeks to val­i­date their ac­tions tak­en or de­ci­sions made be­tween De­cem­ber 2, 2022 and May 18, 2023. Fur­ther­more, the bill seeks to pro­vide that lo­cal gov­ern­ment elec­tions for the year 2023 will be held no lat­er than Au­gust 18, 2023.

Some amend­ments to the bill were made by the At­tor­ney Gen­er­al and were an­nounced dur­ing the com­mit­tee stage of the House sit­ting. A new de­f­i­n­i­tion was pro­posed for coun­cil­lors and al­der­men.

“Coun­cil­lors and Al­der­men mean the per­sons who serve in the cor­po­rate of­fice of the coun­cil dur­ing the pe­ri­od De­cem­ber 1, 2019, to May 18, 2023,” the amend­ments sug­gest­ed.

How­ev­er, the Mem­ber of Par­lia­ment (MP) for Barataria/San Juan, Sad­dam Ho­sein, point­ed out that the last Lo­cal Gov­ern­ment Elec­tion took place on De­cem­ber 2, 2019, and not the first as out­lined in the amend­ment. At­tor­ney Gen­er­al Regi­nald Ar­mour ac­cept­ed the change.

Mean­while, the UNC strong­ly ob­ject­ed to Clause 5 on the bill, which would pro­vide for the val­i­da­tion of the ac­tions of the Coun­cil­lors and Al­der­men whose terms ex­pired in De­cem­ber 2022.”

Op­po­si­tion Leader Kam­la Per­sad-Bisses­sar said she be­lieves it was un­nec­es­sary, while MP Ho­sein re­quest­ed it be delet­ed al­to­geth­er.

“We are of the be­lief that if we are ex­tend­ing the terms of the coun­cil­lors up un­til May 18, 2023, what this par­tic­u­lar clause does, it now val­i­dates the acts of per­sons in of­fices that have ex­pired on May 18, 2023, till the com­mence­ment date of this law. How can we val­i­date ac­tions where per­sons or of­fices have al­ready ex­pired even af­ter the ex­ten­sion?” Ho­sein asked.

How­ev­er, Ar­mour re­ject­ed Ho­sein’s pro­posed amend­ment, as he said he be­lieved the MP mis­un­der­stood Clause Five’s pur­pose.

“This act does not speak about the fu­ture; it seeks to val­i­date two pe­ri­ods; from De­cem­ber 2 to May 18 and the pe­ri­od up to the com­mence­ment of the Act. All this amend­ment is seek­ing to do by Clause 5 is to give leg­isla­tive ef­fi­ca­cy to the De-fac­to Doc­trine up un­til this Bill be­comes an act of Par­lia­ment.”

The Sen­ate will sit to­mor­row (May 31).