There are many questions and answers to some of the campaign issues. An answer to one question does not necessarily mean that it answers other questions. So today I will ask a few questions and give my answers.

Should the parties debate the issues in the campaign? Yes, they should.

Will the People’s National Party’s (PNP) refusal to debate influence the outcome of the elections? In my opinion it will not. In Jamaica, the party that wins is the party that is better organised. And by organisation, I mean the party that gets its supporters enumerated and also gets them into the polling stations. As I always state, elections are won on Election Day. If the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) wins it would not be because the PNP refused to take part in the debate.

Do the PNP’s conditions for debating have merit? Yes, they do.

Should those reasons be used not to have any debate? Yes and no. The debate should go on just the same, but the format should definitely be ‘town hall’. I have no use for a format where the representatives of the two parties know the questions beforehand and can decide which questions they will answer and which they will not. I would like Andrew Holness to be asked if the JLP candidates were required to sign undated letters of resignation. In the traditional format the question might not be used. But if it is a town hall format, I would like to see the question raised, and if he refuses to answer, let that be seen by all.

In my opinion, the allegations of defamation of character should be settled either in or out of court, but should not be put as a condition not to have the debate.

Is this the first time since 1976 that one side has refused to debate? No, it is not. In 1976, there was a programme on

JBC television where, according to the host, he was expecting then Opposition Leader Edward Seaga, but he did not show up. Then Prime Minister Michael Manley was there on spot. I have never heard Edward Seaga say that he was not informed or anything like that.

If there is no debate, who will it affect the most? From the point of view of the electorate, it will affect all of Jamaica, as we should know what the parties stand for. Of course, there are several ways for the parties to get their campaign messages across. From the point of view of specific groups it will affect the media more than any other group, as the night of the debates and the election night itself are the best times for the media houses to get advertisements, which is the lifeblood of public media.

Cock mout’ kill cock

If a candidate in the election slanders another candidate and is found guilty in a court of law, that candidate — apart from paying damages and costs, if so instructed by the court — is disqualified from being elected to parliament for five years. This is not like the dual-citizenship cases where those losing their seats by court action merely gave up their foreign citizenship and contested the bye-election. In this case, the candidate found guilty, having been disqualified for five years, cannot run in the bye-election.

This happened already in Jamaica. As a result of utterances by the late Madame Rose Leon, then a member of the JLP, against Percival Broderick Sr, who was an incumbent PNP member of the House of Representatives (precursor to MP), Rose Leon and George Perrier were disqualified for five years. It is interesting that Perrier was not guilty of uttering any slander, but it was said on his platform so he too was disqualified. That law is still in force in Jamaica. The Constitution of Jamaica states: “Unless repealed by legislation all laws in the former colony of Jamaica on August 5, 1962 become law of independent Jamaica on August 6, 1962.”

Indeed, this is how Donald Sangster was able to retake a seat in the House of Representatives. Having lost in the old South St Elizabeth constituency, he contested the North Clarendon bye-election and defeated Percival Broderick Sr. But in St Andrew Western the JLP was not so lucky. On February I, 1956, William Seivright defeated Arthur Leon, husband of Rose Leon, and the PNP’s seat count of the then 32-seat house went up to 19.

With regard to slander of one candidate by another, however, “they that hath ears to hear, let them hear”.

ekrubm765@yahoo.com