The Editor, Sir:

I find it bizarre that the prime minister should have said, in the context of election petitions, during Tuesday's sitting of the House, as reported in your publication of March 25: "It is an issue that not only has been used to question the legitimacy of the Parliament, but I don't think I would be overstating it if I were to say it is a means that is being pursued as a basis for consti-tutionally overthrowing the elected Government of Jamaica,"

If he was boasting with glee, his party's Daryl Vaz having whipped the People's National Party's Kenneth Rowe in the by-election, then he may be partly forgiven for casting as villains those who pursue means as provided by the Constitution and the law for redress of what is believed to be a breach. Even if that were the case, I believe a PM ought not to be making such potentially inflammatory and ambiguous statements that amount to irresponsibility.

Change a government

'Overthrow' in the usual connotation, and in the mind of the man in the street, when linked to 'government', is associated with unlawful means to change a government, whether duly elected or not. In the recent and impending petitions, what unlawful means were being "strategically used ... to topple his government"? In the same tone, is the PM saying the PNP was trying to stage a coup? Is the PM also saying that election petitions should never be pursued when the JLP forms the govern-ment, particularly when it has only a wafer-thin majority?

By-election order

I do not recall any arguments that the petition in Dabdoub vs Vaz was frivolous, and indeed, there was an affirmation by both courts that the petition was of substance evidenced by Vaz being disqualified and a by-election ordered. Isn't this the rule of law in action, Mr PM?

As to the Leader of the Opposition, Portia Simpson Miller, reportedly declaring that the PNP " ... will never take power in this country unless it is by the ballots", that, too, is equally bizarre.

Given the provision in law for election petitions, it is conceivable that a situation could arise where that becomes possible, because the remedy may be seats are awarded to the opposition party, thus giving them a majority in Parliament and the right to form the government. Is the opposition leader declaring that if such situation were to arise she would refuse forming a government and thereby forcing the GG to call a general election? Or was it just one of her usual outbursts?

I am, etc.,

NORMAN LEE

namronlee@rogers.com

Ontario, Canada