Articles 5 and 18. The debate on District Reps on RIGCAA EC.
Kirkpatrick Weah
New Constitutional Debate on District Representation
It is often said that “Paul Coffey died before his plan was realized. Thanks to the Lord that I am not yet dead (Kirkpatrick Weah. August 24, 2010).
How did the equal representation debate start in Minnesota, 2008?
It started with each district electing two persons on the Board. This made it to 12 persons with 3 non Geepos citizens being on the Board per invitation. This would have made it 15 Board members. This proposition was rejected. It was said that the number was too much. We than arrived at Article 5( 1) (b). The equal representation on the Board was vehemently opposed by Alfred Davies, Alfred Quayee, Kaye Nowinnie, Chelly Nowinnie and others.
A motion from Mr. Alfred Davies to reduce 15 Board members to 7 and a maximum 9 board members respectively including rejection of equal representation of districts on the Board was seconded by Kaye Nowinnie with majority votes. This is how we arrived at Section 5 (a). See below.
I quickly shifted to Article 18. I asked, “Does this affect Article 18 ( 1)? Almost everybody who were against equal representation on the Board said yes. As far as I am concern, that kicks away more than two persons from any one district being on the Executive and arrived us at Article 18 ( 3) which was not discussed and amended.
Jumping from Article 5 to Article 18 made Mr. Chelly Nowinnie to have raised his concern that adopting a constitution without going through it chapter by chapter and section by section was a bad thing. He appealed that it was better to adopt the constitution at the next convention (PA). It is at this time, that Gbesi came out and said that the remaining potion of the constitution was to be “Completed at the next convention.” “We have to move on to other things.” Said Gbesi.
My argument
Because Article 18 ( 2) ( 3) were not placed into abeyance during the deliberation, they remain standing constitutional provisions.
Prima facie, “The President, Vice President, Secretary, Treasurer, Parliamentarian shall not come from the same district save there is no candidate from any of the six districts to seek an election to one of the executive positions supra.”
Now, what is the constitutional debate here? The constitution provides that “save” meaning unless a candidate from any of the six districts is not seeking to be elected to one of the positions suppra, than more than one and not more than two shall be elected to the Executive Committee.
This is the intent of the framers. If you have Ms. X seeking the same position on another ticket, than it means that a candidate from one of the districts satisfies the constitutional requirement. The constitution does nor provide for a second interpretation to the provision.
When I said in Minnesota that such method of constitutional adoption was problematic and could create confusion in the future, all anti-equal representation on the Board and the EC, nobody listen to me. Here we are today.
You cannot interpret a legal document and cite verses in the Bible when the suit your desire and wishes. It does not work this way.
It is sad that River Gee citizens, who suffered discrimination in Grand Gedeh will sit at a convention and fight against equal representation clauses in its constitution.
Here are the provisions as enshrined.
Section 5: National Board of Directors
Section 5.1: Composition of the Board
a. The Board of Directors shall comprise of a minimum of 7 members and a maximum of 9 members. The President shall not have voting power save in a situation where the votes are tied.
b. Not more than two persons from the same district shall serve on the Board of Directors save the President.
Article 18: District Representation
- Each district shall have not more than two representatives on the Board and the Executive Committee;
- The President and Vice President shall not come from the same district.
- The President, Vice President, Secretary, Treasurer, Parliamentarian shall not come from the same district save there is no candidate from any of the six districts to seek an election to one of the executive positions supra;
Kirkpatrick Weah
Commentator on the intent of the framers of RIGCAA’s constitution.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Voice of-Geepos" group.
To post to this group, send email to voice-o...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to voice-of-geep...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/voice-of-geepos?hl=en.