The Tribune

EDITOR, The Tribune.

What are the implications of the Supreme Court judgment, the Immigration decision where finally the Court has confirmed what was known all of the while that law dictates what happens and not “political policy”.

Could this decision have the most serious implications on the outcome of Baha Mar - Baha Mar received over $1 billion worth of economic and incentive tax concessions but taking this Immigration judgment forward the Agreement - Heads of Agreement does not hold up in a Court of Law as the concession in this case and all others should have been like what the UBP did, correctly, enact a specific Act of legislation so came The Hawksbill Agreement.

This judgment further positive concludes that the alleged restriction as to the number of Licensed Casinos is not valid so the restriction-covenant written into the original Heads of Agreement with Sol Kerzner is invalid so finally we will have more than the restricted three-casinos PI-Cable Beach and in the future South Ocean (if that is ever developed).

This also effects the decisions of NEC-National Economic Council which incredibly under three-governments operated outside the Constitution where the sole authority of governance is in the hands of the appointed Cabinet. The NEC is a fragment, not the whole of the Cabinet.

So every Heads of Agreement retroactively have to be written into law - all agreements authorised by the NEC also... boy Parliament will be busy.

What a mess why can’t our legislators seek good advice when they start something which is so blatantly and obviously unsupported by law.

Policy is for the politicians - laws are the rule of law that solely and exclusively governs us or the rest is garbage!

W THOMPSON

Nassau,

November 29, 2015.