The Tribune

HOUSE Speaker Dr Kendal Major did not allow Montagu MP Richard Lightbourn to explain why it was necessary to appoint a select committee over the nolle prosequi signed by then acting Attorney General Jerome Fitzgerald.

Dr Major said yesterday that Mr Lightbourn would only be allowed to speak on the matter under two conditions which included being granted leave by the leader of government business, Dr Bernard Nottage or during a private meeting in the Speaker’s Chambers.

“It seems to me that members opposite,” Mr Lightbourn said, “may think that this issue is going to go away by making some statement (that I did not think was substantiated).”

However, before he could continue, Dr Nottage stood to the microphone and questioned whether the assertions could be allowed according to House procedures.

Mr Lightbourn was speaking after being recognised by Dr Major during a segment in the proceedings in which MP’s were expressing condolences to bereaved constituents.

Three times the Speaker ordered Mr Lightbourn to take his seat as the two men remained standing.

“The chair has determined that it will have to seek advice from the Attorney General’s office which would be the legal authority governing the Speaker’s research on the matter,” he said.

“If it can be placed in writing and tabled in this House then the chair is obliged to remove that from the order of business. So essentially you have every right to speak to any issue you desire as long as it is within the rules. But at this point in the agenda it is out of order to expect your wishes to go forward.”

However, the explanation was not accepted by Mr Lightbourn who insisted that the Speaker had the authority to hear his arguments.

“This is a democratic setting. Following the rules, the member for South Eleuthera made a statement without substantiating in any way the basis for which he made that statement. I have not been given an opportunity to respond. There is clear authority here for this House to investigate any matter concerning a nolle issued by the Attorney General.

“Therefore I would have thought that at minimum you would give me the opportunity to put forward my case without simply relying on a statement from the AG’s office and that is why I would ask to have that opportunity,” Mr Lightbourn said.

Janice Hayles and George Hayles each faced a charge of possession of a firearm and possession of ammunition.

It was claimed that on February 3, 2010 the two were found in possession of a .380 pistol and 19 live rounds of ammunition for the weapon.

The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges at their arraignment days after their arrest in 2010.

The nolle prosequi was initially rejected by the deputy chief magistrate because the document was not dated and it was not clear who had signed it.

However, once rectified, the case was discontinued on December 28.