Richards right to seek answers
There seems to be some unnecessary confusion surrounding the President's requests for clarification on the early proclamation of Section 34.
Some ministers, political analysts and lay persons have argued that the President should not be now seeking answers for the contentious implementation of the bill as he himself signed it off.
However, didn't the Prime Minister herself say that she was seriously misled by the then minister of justice and that her entire Cabinet endorsed the proclamation on the basis of false information?
As expected, the President may feel even more greatly deceived as he was more "out of the loop" in terms of the structuring of the legislation and was therefore dependent on the Government to bring before him a document worthy of his signature. Had he not signed off on Section 34 he surely would have been seen as being an obstructionist.
Many persons have come to have serious doubt about the idea that the former minister of justice is the only member of the Government who bears culpability for this fiasco.
Furthermore, the Prime Minister's previous statements on the matter left much room for ambiguity and dissonance regarding the actions of her Cabinet. The request for the report therefore is justifiable and reasonable as it may help to identify other persons or processes that facilitated the premature proclamation of this section. The citizens of Trinidad and Tobago stand to benefit the most from the President's request.