Copyright stabroeknews
Dear Editor, It is indeed a quandary. It would seem the return of the ‘substantive’ office holder was not expected. The principle of reverting was upheld by one but not the other. Were the instruments of appointments unspecified in terms of duration of tenure? If the duration was to be short lived why give instruments of appointments which convey the impression that the appointments were long term in nature? Now everyone is mum and separation of powers is the claim of the day. How one party reverts but the other refuses? The instruments should be revoked and cancelled thereby allowing the principle of reverting to be observed. This is an unprecedented development of embarrassing promotions. Shamshun Mohamed
