The decisions will be delivered five days before the 29th anniversary of the country's independence on November 1, 2010, which will be a day of thanksgiving and celebration as is our custom. This address to you is necessary, because of the misinformation which was fed to the public by the Opposition Party immediately following the delivery of the judgment of Madam Justice Louise Blenman on March 31, 2010 and the chaos which resulted before good sense prevailed, and before the law was allowed to take its course. We are a law-abiding country, and the Rule of Law must be observed by everyone at all times - good times or bad times.

I must advise at the outset that, should the Court of Appeal uphold the Appeal of the three UPP elected Representatives and overturn the decision of Justice Blenman, the government would remain fully in tact. However, should the Court of Appeal uphold or confirm the High Court judgment in all of the three cases that is,- declare that the elections in the constituencies of St. John's Rural West, St. George, and St. John's Rural North are void - this WOULD NOT give rise to a constitutional crisis. Both the Representation of the People Act, Cap. 379, and the Constitution of Antigua and Barbuda provide clear and logical steps as to what is to happen following such a judgment.

Section 52 of the Representation of the People Act provides that at the conclusion of the trial of an election petition, the election court, which was the High Court presided over by Madam Justice Blenman, shall certify in writing its decision to the Speaker of the House of Representatives along with a report (where necessary) of corrupt or illegal practices which may have occurred at the election. The Court rejected ALL claims and allegations made against the UPP candidates in respect of all fraud, corrupt and illegal practices. That section further states that the House of Representatives "shall order the certificate and report (if any) to be entered in the report of the House and shall give the necessary direction for confirming or altering the return, or for the issue of a writ for a new election, or for carrying the determination into execution, as the circumstances may require;"

Clearly then it is the House, on receiving the certificate of the court, which is duty-bound to alter the official election returns in its records by deleting the names of the affected candidates, and declare the seats of the affected candidates vacant. Until the House meets, the affected candidates remain members of Parliament despite the decision of the court. In other words, the handing down by the court of its decision does not automatically remove the affected candidates as Members of Parliament. This is in keeping with tradition and law that Parliament regulates its own procedure.

The court can only declare the elections in the three constituencies void; it CANNOT declare the affected seats vacant, and section 52 of the Representation of the People Act is clear on that point.

Should the election in the constituency of St John's Rural West be one of those upheld to be void by the Court of Appeal, and the seat stands to be declared vacant by the House, what will happen to the office of Prime Minister which is currently held by that Member of Parliament?

The House of Representatives has 17 seats: 9 members of the United Progressive Party plus 1 member of the Barbuda Peoples Movement who together form the Government; and 7 members of the Antigua Labour Party who form the Opposition. No where in the Constitution does it state how or where Members of Parliament must be seated. Clearly though, members who support the government would be seated on one side of the floor, while members who oppose the government would sit on the other side; that does not mean that the Member for Barbuda has given up his party. His appointment as a Minister of Government confirms his support of and for the UPP Administration. In the same way, members of the Liberal Democrats in Britain's House of Commons support the Conservative Party to form the government, the Deputy Prime Minister is in fact the Leader of the Liberal Democrats, and they all sit on the same side in the House. Again, in Australia two Independent MP's had to team up with the Labour MP's to allow the latter to obtain a majority to form the government following recent elections.

It is the Governor General's duty to appoint a Prime Minister. In the ordinary course of things the Governor General must, by section 69(1) of the Constitution appoint as Prime Minister (a) "a member of the House who is leader in the House of the political party that commands the support of the majority of members of the House." In the event that the 3 contested UPP seats are declared invalid by the House, the equality of seats on either side of the House at that time, will mean that neither leader will be able to claim command of the support of a majority of members. The framers of the Constitution foresaw that possibility and provided an alternative in section 69(1) (b): "where it appears to him that such party does not have an undisputed leader in the House or that no party commands the support of such a majority,[the Governor General will appoint ], the member of the house who in his judgment is most likely to command the support of the majority of members of the House . . ." It was under that latter sub-section that Patrick Manning was appointed Prime Minister in Trinidad and Tobago in December 2001 when the general election gave each of the two parties 18 seats each, thus giving neither party a majority in the House.

The House as presently constituted would be divided, in such an event, 6 members of the UPP and 1 member of the BPM supporting the government and 7 members of the ALP on the Opposition benches. The question of the appointment of a Prime Minister would rest on the shoulders of the governor General acting in her own discretion. No member can force himself to be appointed Prime Minister or advise the Governor General that he should be Prime Minister. We would therefore need, as law-abiding citizens to respect the determination of the Governor General, should such a circumstance arise.

Of course, should the court hold less than 3 elections void, the UPP would clearly maintain its hold of the majority of seats in the House, and there could be no question as to which party would form the government.

My fellow Antiguans and Barbudans, this is a moment in the history of our country which demands calm heads and steady hands in running the affairs of our nation. It is also a moment in our proud democracy, which requires the demonstration of commitment to nationhood by all the people. The world will be watching us.

The Government wishes to assure the nation that there is no reason for anyone to panic or become overly excited. There must also be a recommitment to law and order at every level.

Let all of us, as one united nation, rise to the challenge of the moment. Let us all move forward as one people committed to the interest of our fair nation, Antigua and Barbuda.

May God continue to Bless our nation and our people.
Thank you.