The AG Office is being used as a political bludgeon by the PLP ........... this is not the role of the AG Office under the Westminster system .......... An AG should be theoretically an apolitical post to offer impartial legal advice to the government and interpret legal positions of the government on constitutional matters that impact internal and external matters.

This is plain public political delay tactics used by the AG Officeto frustrate the Opposition and the citizenry ............. Nolle, VAG probe, BAMSI, BOB, BEC, BTC 2%, PAC and now RUBIS ...................... this blatant political interference must stop!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm with you Duppy! I was a few sentences in when I was like this is some straight up BS! I am really disappointed in all parties involved; especially Braves comment on how the accountant was being lambasted after the report was made.

Nobody will ever be forced to resign or be fired no matter how blatant the political crime - certainly not under Christie's administration (of course this with the exception of the "fall guy" for the LOI, Wells). The bigger the "ka-huna" (Mother Pratt, Gray, etc.) the bigger the cover up. No shock here.

What was the criteria when Sim Bowe resigned or Ervin Knowles resigned? Anyone know?

ask AD Hanna or Arthur Foulkes ............... if they can remember

Here we once again see the AG's Office being misused and abused by the AG (Allyson Maynard-Gibson) with the objective of shielding and providing political cover for serious transgressions of incompetent appointees and corrupt supporters of the Christie-led administration. Maynard-Gibson has time and time again acted in a way that should leave her stripped of the protections afforded her Office by our Constitution. She has repeatedly demonstrated her willingness to egregiously abuse the AG's Office to the detriment of the Bahamian people. The Bahamian people should be insisting with a mighty voice that she be held accountable for her many egregious acts as AG, and equally egregious failures to properly act in accordance with the requirements and decorum expected of her Office. When the time is right her many instances of misconduct as AG should be made the subject of a full and proper investigation and hopefully that time is not too far off now.

That decision did not come from the AG office. . . and signed by nobody! Persons who are familiar with written opinions submitted by the AG knows full well that each submission is signed by the researching officer on an official AG letter head. That opinion document itself did not follow customary judicial protocol in obtaining opinions from the AG office.

Further more, Article 136 (4) states that the A-G shall submit his reports made under paragraph (3) of this Article without delay to the Speaker of the House. . . who shall cause them to be laid before the HOU without undue delay[sic].

That's is the long and short of the Article. . .therefore, the "ghost" AG opinion itself ultra vires and exceeds the letter and convolutes the spirit of the law. Further, the PAC is a organ of the HOU. . .ruled by the speaker. . .who can lay the report before the HOU before he presents it to his PAC or at the same time of presentation have the HOU PAC review the findings by calling persons before that body to review the A-G findings. . .because HOU cannot call members of the public for further information.

After the A-G presents his reports to the speaker, according to Constitution, the speaker must present it to the HOU as soon as possible. . . and he is within his constitutional mandate if he allows the PAC, a confirmation/clarification body within the parameter of the HOU, under the Constitutional responsibility of the speaker!!

The term used for presentation of the A-G report to HOU is "without undue delay". . .not "without delay"! PAC can be that "due delay" THAT MUST BE DONE BEFORE THE REPORT IS PRESENTED BEFORE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE!!

That principle was the same opinion used by the AG when she was pressed on the late presentation of the Rubis report. . .we had to check some things before she made the findings public!!!

Keep it simple: The Attorney-General (Allyson Maynard-Gibson) is royally pissed that a draft yet to be signed legal opinion prepared by her Office (presumably with her knowledge and blessing) somehow made its way to Dr. Bernard Nottage who in turn hand delivered it to the Speaker of The House. We won't hold our breath though waiting for Dr. Nottage to shed some light on how he came to be in possession of the legal opinion. Safe to say though, It does seem quite plausible (if not obvious) that the intent of the draft opinion was to intimidate the House Speaker without the AG and her Office taking any responsibility for the scandalous intimidation tactic.