Commissioner Louie Laveist has survived yet another round of voting on a motion brought by the National Alliance (NA) seeking to remove him from the Executive Council.
The motion originally was brought to the floor of the Island Council in December 2008 and the vote was tied again yesterday. The voting was clearly along party lines, with the Democratic Party (DP) members voting against the motion and the NA members voting in favour.
Commissioner Laveist himself did not vote, though he was accidentally called on to do so and stated that he was against the motion. Island Council Chairman Lt. Governor Franklyn Richards noted that this had been a mistake and Laveist’s vote was struck from the record.
Prior to the vote, Laveist had asked for clarification concerning whether he was able to cast a vote on the motion. Richards advised that this would not be allowed, based on his interpretation of the Islands Regulation ERNA.
DP leader Commissioner Sarah Wescot-Williams and Laveist, while deferring to the chairman’s judgement, made it clear that they did not agree with his interpretation of the regulation. Wescot-Williams said her faction would object to the chairman’s ruling through other means.
The Lt. Governor based his decision not to allow Laveist to vote on the motion on Article 38 of the ERNA. According to Richards, this article addresses Island Council members refraining from casting a vote concerning appointments, suspensions and dismissals pertaining to themselves, their spouses, or family members to the third degree.
Richards said this article safeguarded against members making decisions based on personal interests. He said that in cases such as the one being handled involving Laveist, "It is highly improbable that the persons involved would not have any personal interest in voting on a motion of no confidence against his or her person."
Richards further stated that, should Laveist not follow his advice and vote, he would have no choice but to send the matter to the Governor of the Netherlands Antilles for annulment.
Laveist, reacting to Richards’ statements, equated the matter to the voting on the appointment of a commissioner, which he said was also deeply personal. Laveist questioned why, if a person was able to vote for himself to be appointed to the Executive Council, he was not able to vote on matters pertaining to votes of no confidence.
"What can be more personal than voting to appoint a commissioner? Voting for a commissioner is basically a vote of confidence and a commissioner can vote for himself. So why then, when voting on a motion of no confidence, a commissioner cannot vote to defend himself?" asked Laveist, who now sits in the Island Council as an independent member.
Laveist said he did not see the matter as being a personal one, as it pertained to the function of commissioner and, therefore, he also was not in agreement with Richards’ interpretation.
Richards maintained his stance, noting that he had done the same on the matter concerning a motion of no confidence against Commissioner Maria Buncamper-Molanus.
In motivating his vote for the motion against Laveist, National Alliance leader William Marlin deplored the fact that Laveist was still receiving support from the Democratic Party and said, "St. Maarten is facing a sad moment in its political history."
Marlin questioned whether it was in the best interest of people on the island to have a commissioner who was under investigation represent them. He also said the NA was not interested in Laveist’s removal from the Executive Council for personal gain, as it would be the DP, not the NA, that would appoint a new Commissioner.
Wescot-Williams, in reaction to Marlin’s statement, told the NA that the motion it was presenting was against the same person with whom it had tried to form a new government in November 2008 when it was already known that Laveist was under investigation.
"They owe the people just as much an explanation as to what and how. What exactly the National Alliance was to do with their new government is yet to be told to the St. Maarten public. It goes to show that when the opening is there for a faction or even members of a faction to form a government, how one or several would go to all lengths to do exactly that," Wescot-Williams said.
She added, "It is unfortunate where we as a government find ourselves today. It is going to be solved, but it is not going to be solved by the members of the Democratic Party faction voting for a motion by the National Alliance against Commissioner Louie Laveist, their motion of no confidence. Having stated that, I vote against."
Based on the fact that the motion had been voted on twice and the vote had been tied both times, Richards declared that it had not been adopted and closed the session.
It initially appeared the vote would have to be postponed due to the absence of Commissioner Roy Marlin, who was in a conference call with a minister in the Netherlands. Roy had requested that the vote be suspended until his return and Richards said he was inclined to grant this request, noting that the meeting had originally been scheduled for 10:00am, but had been rescheduled due to an earlier meeting in which Patrick Illidge’s credentials had been approved.
This decision drew sharp criticism from William Marlin, who questioned whether the chairman of the Island Council was not setting an unsavoury precedent. He reminded Richards that other members of the council also wore multiple hats and said it was the responsibility of council members to ensure that they were available for meetings.
William Marlin said that, particularly in light of the ramifications of the commissioner’s absence for the vote, the Chairman should not make such a unilateral decision. Richards noted that it was within his capacity to grant the commissioner’s request to adjourn the meeting and emphasised that in this particular situation he would do so.
However, Roy Marlin returned before a vote was taken on whether the meeting should be suspended and that paved the way for members to proceed with voting on the motion of no-confidence. In motivating his vote, the commissioner said he did not approve of the way in which his request had been addressed by William Marlin.