Reverend William Watty comment on Anthony Astaphan contribution to Election Law amendment (Part 3)

​We now give you Part 3, of Reverend William Watty’s comments on Attorney Anthony Astaphan’s contribution to the DLP’s proposed Electoral Law amendment.
 
Reverend William Watty continued his comments on Attorney Anthony Astaphan’s contribution to the proposed Electoral Law amendments by saying …. “Let those political leaders who are in need of one, or any mouth-piece that needs a political leader, find one another and cleave; but Mr. Linton so far as I can surmise, will not for a long time be that Leader, nor God helping me, will I diminish myself to become another man’s mouth. God’s mouth is more than enough for me. That clarified, I must now protest that nowhere have I ever written, hinted, implied or suggested that the provision of transportation, not previously requested, constitutes a crime. Whether it be so or not, I have neither the competence nor the ambition to pronounce on such matters”.
 
“Mr Astaphan should therefore read again what I wrote, or else hire an eye-piece to make up for any difficulty he might have in deciphering the vocabulary, or unscrambling the complicated grammar. What I suggested was that, in the situation of an Election, whether in the planning stages or the on-going process, any offer of transportation made to a prospective Elector, that was not first requested was, in that context, tantamount to bribery. That is still my position, like it or lump it. Multiplying it by the hundreds, elevating it in aircrafts, legalizing it ‘for the avoidance of doubt’, will not change the reality. It still spells bribery”.
 
“It has nothing to do with the would-be benefactor’s intention which is, if I may say so, a red-herring; for who, but the corrupt inducer, can divine the ‘intention corruptly to induce’? However, whether it is, or should be, a crime is quite another matter and none of my business. Cite your Halsbury and all the eminent jurists if you like, it is of no avail. Deodorize it as best you can, bribery remains bribery. It is the context of an impending or on-going Election that renders the premature, because unrequested, offer so inappropriate that, when multiplied in plane loads, it becomes so scandalous and so dangerous. On the day following the Election, an offer of transportation, made by the same benefactor, to the same beneficiary, requested or not, and in the same vehicle, to the same destination, along the same route, will not be a bribe, but an act of kindness’. …. (Part 4) in the morning news.