Opposition Senator Peter Bunting was forced to withdraw a comment he made in the Senate on Friday as he sparred with Government counterpart Abka Fitz-Henley over controversial certificates of immunity he had issued to three Jamaica Defence Force soldiers charged with murder.

The clash occurred during a debate in the Upper House on an amendment to the Appropriations Bill – which authorises the government to spend its annual budget – following an error that saw statutory expenditures inadvertently included in the Act.

Earlier in the debate, Opposition Senator Lambert Brown argued that the Government was acting unconstitutionally in passing the amendment. He listed what he argued was a record of constitutional violation by the Andrew Holness-led administration including the passage of the National Identification System (NIDS) Act.

But Fitz-Henley refuted Brown’s argument that the amendment to the Appropriations Bill was unconstitutional.

“We are pursuing lawful means in correcting an error in transcription which impacted the Appropriations Bill. I am not convinced by the senator’s posit,” Fitz-Henley said, adding “This does not rise to the level of issues concerning the Suppression of Crimes Act under a former administration which were found to be unconstitutional. It does not rise to the level of the immunity certificates which in 2020 the Supreme Court found to be in breach.”

That comment angered Bunting who in February 2016, nearly six years after businessman Keith Clarke’s death and four years after three soldiers were charged with murder, issued immunity certificates to the accused.

“You are a liar, you are a liar!” an irate Bunting shouted as he objected to Fitz-Henley’s comment, drawing a stern rebuke from Senate President Tom Tavares-Finson.

“Senator Bunting you know better, you know better,” Tavares-Finson said.

Leader of Government Business in the Senate, Kamina Johnson-Smith rose on a point of order and insisted that Bunting withdraw the comment. Bunting obliged.

“If my comment was unparliamentary, I withdraw the comment that the senator was misleading,” the Opposition senator said.

However, he insisted that it must be noted that the Appeal Court had reversed the Supreme Court’s ruling that the certificates were manifestly unfair, unreasonable, invalid and consequently in contravention of the constitution.

Fitz-Henley concluded his presentation by commenting further on the issue of the argument advanced by the Opposition that the amendment to the Appropriations Bill, which was eventually approved in the Senate, is unconstitutional.

“I’ve heard Senator Brown’s submissions concerning the amendment being made to the bill and it appears to me that due process is being observed. So Senator Brown, let’s be clear, it’s not the bombshell that you make it out to be, it’s not the bombshell, it really is not,” Fitz-Henley said.