Reverend William Watty comment on Anthony Astaphan contribution to Election Law amendment (Part 4)

​We now continue with Part 4, 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 …. “The Election is over. However, in the context of an imminent Election, an offer of transportation that was not requested can mean only one thing, and for its determination, the intention or motivation of the would-be benefactor, being inaccessible and, in any event, inherently unreliable, is manifestly irrelevant”.
 
“Last, but not least, in recalling the time-honored practice of Political Parties mobilizing their members for transportation to Polling Stations, Mr. Astaphan, in casting aspersion on the importance I attached to the initiative of a request, may have either overlooked or chosen to ignore my mention of mitigating circumstances, deriving from substantive relationships characterized by depth, constancy and continuity”.
 
“The particular example I cited was the obvious one of marriage, but the principle could reasonably be extended to Political Parties, or any other stable grouping with registered membership, where prior arrangements for transportation might quite legitimately anticipate consent from affiliated members, without incurring the charge of bribery. Such a facility might, of course, be extended also to other passengers, ‘supporters’ or not, provided that the offer was in response to an initial request, and approved without duress or strings attached, or refused without prejudice. What is difficult about that?
 
That was the final part of Reverend William Watty’s comments on Attorney Anthony Astaphan’s contribution to the DLP’s proposed Electoral Law amendment.