設為首頁收藏本站

A-Plus互動討論區

 找回密碼
 立即註冊

Login

免註冊即享有會員功能

搜索
熱搜: 活動 交友 discuz
查看: 9|回復: 0
打印 上一主題 下一主題

O. J. Simpson Bills Jersey l02pnq1t

[複製鏈接]

3萬

主題

3萬

帖子

9萬

積分

論壇元老

Rank: 8Rank: 8

積分
95416
跳轉到指定樓層
樓主
發表於 2017-5-19 13:09:11 | 只看該作者 回帖獎勵 |倒序瀏覽 |閱讀模式
分享到: 更多
Opposition perturbed at manner in which contentious legislation was approvedThe opposition parties in the National Assembly have described the manner in which the Court of Appeal (Amendment) Bill was passed by the National Assembly,Gilbert Perreault Sabres Throwback Jersey, Thursday evening, as a complete sham and a slap in the face of democracy.The Bill was first read in 2008 and then referred to a Special Select Committee where contributions and possible amendments could be made. But the manner with which the process was eventually proceeded, caused the opposition speaker to slam the Minister of Legal Affairs, Charles Ramson.Following the tabling of the report by Ramson, the Shadow Legal Affairs Minister,Terrell Davis Denver Broncos Throwback Jersey, Clarrisa Reihl, rose to make her presentation on the motion to have the House receive the report and things descended into a downward spiral.Reihl proceeded to put her presentation in context and attempted to give some background on what transpired in the Committee stage but was interrupted by Ramson who attempted to have Reihl’s comments restricted.Ramson appealed to the Speaker to restrain Reihl based on his interpretation of the Parliamentary Standing Orders,Bruce Smith Bills Throwback Jersey, which he said,Paul Krause Vikings Throwback Jersey, does not allow for any kind of regurgitation of any history of what took place in the select committee.“It says here quite clearly when a Bill has been reported from a select committee which has been done, the Assembly may proceed to consider the Bill as reported from the Select Committee.’It soon was made clear why Ramson did not want to have Reihl expound on the issue as it was revealed that no suggestion from any entity or person was utilised by Ramson who was the chairperson of the Committee.Reihl explained to the House that in the two years that the Bill was in committee, nine meetings were held and on the day the report was adopted the meeting lasted for 11 minutes.She told the House that the Bill is very important and of the nine meetings,Cal Ripken Orioles Throwback Jersey, the PNCR missed one because it was postponed by the Chairman and rescheduled without consultation.Reihl said that in that eighth meeting when all the opposition members were absent and the draft report was made out, there were no recommendations made with the exception of the Guyana Women Lawyers Association, who made extensive written submissions, and the Director of Public Prosecution.She said that nothing was taken into consideration.She told the House that the minutes of the meeting stated that Ramson had indicated that, “since there were no viable suggestions on amendments of the Bill,Danny Ainge Celtics Throwback Jersey, both at the National Assembly and at the committee level,Thurman Thomas Bills Throwback Jersey, he saw the need to speedily pursue its completion.”This,Cleveland Browns Throwback Jersey, she said, makes a sham of the Select Committee process. “It calls into question the process of Select Committee which is supposed to scrutinise and refine legislation and take into consideration outsiders whose views we solicited in the first instance.”People’s Progressive Party Member of Parliament, Bibi Shadick, told the House that the views of the Women Lawyers’ position coincided with the opposition that the Bill should not be and that the Director of Public Prosecutions wanted more far reaching powers.Basil Williams, of the PNCR,Derrick Thomas Chiefs Throwback Jersey, questioned what the purpose of the Select Committee was if the opposition were not given adequate avenues to ventilate their recommendations and have them reflected in the report.He said that the Bill should be recommitted to the select committee but Ramson said that this was not possible.The opposition had long complained that the Bill, if enacted, will set a dangerous precedent of alarming proportions in that it could allow an innocent person to languish in jail for life, given that the DPP could under the legislation, appeal acquittals at every level of the judiciary.
回復

使用道具 舉報

您需要登錄後才可以回帖 登錄 | 立即註冊

本版積分規則

重要聲明:本討論區是以即時上載留言的方式運作,A-Plus補習討論區對所有留言的真實性、完整性及立場等,不負任何法律責任。而一切留言之言論只代表留言者個人意見,並非本網站之立場,讀者及用戶不應信賴內容,並應自行判斷內容之真實性。於有關情形下,讀者及用戶應尋求專業意見(如涉及醫療、法律或投資等問題)。 由於本討論區受到「即時上載留言」運作方式所規限,故不能完全監察所有留言,若讀者及用戶發現有留言出現問題,請聯絡我們。A-Plus補習討論區有權刪除任何留言及拒絕任何人士上載留言(刪除前或不會作事先警告及通知),同時亦有不刪除留言的權利,如有任何爭議,管理員擁有最終的詮釋權。用戶切勿撰寫粗言穢語、誹謗、渲染色情暴力或人身攻擊的言論,敬請自律。本網站保留一切法律權利。

手機版|小黑屋|A-Plus互動討論區    

GMT+8, 2024-5-18 15:12 , Processed in 0.070492 second(s), 26 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3

© 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

快速回復 返回頂部 返回列表