ArchiveOpposition Member of Parliament Peter David had said that the Grenada government has some explaining to do about the matter.
Earlier, lawyer Anselm Clouden reported that effective February 2 the government had abolished remission - which allows good behaved prisoners to have nine months counted as a year of their sentences
Dr. Mitchell's critics say many questions still remain on the act - questions the prime minister now says he can not speak to.
"I would not give the rational behind it .I just simple think it is important to note that it was done and it was then rescinded immediately" Dr. Mitchell told a news conference in St. George's.
"I do not wish to go into that. It was a reason of national security and I would leave it at that .The fact is the status quo continues and will not be interfered with I think that's important in the future I could give you that assurance" Prime Minister Mitchell told Journalists. Last month, Prime Minister Mitchell repealed the long standing remission rule in the island's prison ordinance which rewarded good behavior by cutting a third of the time off prison sentences - but then changed back again to the original rule. Opposition Member of Parliament Peter David had called on the Prime Minister to provide answers on the reasons for the change in ordinance, adding that government needed to explain to the parliamentary opposition as well as Grenadians. David called a news conference to say that the goings-on leave more questions than answers. "Why is it that in the dead of night the government chose to remove what has been our system of laws for over 30 years? Why have they chosen to remove it and no explanation has been forthcoming and we of the National Democratic Congress have been absolutely concerned as to why this was done in the first place" David, the General Secretary of the NDC, told reporters. "What is the government attempting to do? Is there some kind of sinister objective that we are unaware of? We believe that the government owes an explanation not only to us the parliamentary opposition but also the people of this country as to why this was done". But government's legal advisor Hugh Wildman has been quoted as saying the issue is now much ado about nothing - since government has since changed its mind and gone back to the original status. "It was repealed the following day. The fact is that the minister in his own deliberate judgment said there was a need to do certain things and after certain deliberations took place there was obviously no need to do what was actually done so the minister went back to the original position and restore the rules" Wildman said. "I cant speak to the reasons, I can speak from a legal standpoint that the minister has the power to amend the rules as he sees fit in his own deliberate judgment."
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
