United Democratic Party (UDP) Chairman Michael Peyrefitte insists that Patrick Faber, Tracy Panton, Beverly Williams, and John Saldivar were not expelled from the party; however, he argues they have "constructively resigned" by forming the Alliance for Democracy and publicly criticizing the party's leadership.
During a recent interview, Peyrefitte defended the UDP leadership’s position, stating that the actions taken by Faber, Panton, Williams, and Saldivar have effectively removed them from the party’s fold. He argued that by creating an intra-party faction and challenging the leadership publicly, these members violated the UDP Constitution, which, according to Peyrefitte, prohibits factionalism and public criticism of the party's leadership.
"No one person nor a few persons are bigger than the United Democratic Party," Peyrefitte stated, emphasizing the need for unity and discipline within the party.
The UDP’s leadership, over the last few weeks, has argued that the concept of "constructive resignation" applies in this case because the actions of the AfD members have breached the party's rules to such an extent that it amounts to an implicit resignation.
"Show me where the UDP has taken a position where we say they were expelled. Constructively resigned. Show me where the UDP has stated that anybody has been expelled," challenged Peyrefitte.
He maintained that the party had not officially expelled these members but rather viewed their actions as a voluntary departure from the party's principles and structure.
When questioned about the allegations of not adhering to the UDP Constitution, Peyrefitte dismissed these claims, suggesting that the leadership had consistently acted in the best interests of the party. While speaking vaguely, he alluded to the fact that AfD members are likewise breaching several parts of the UDP Constitution.
He reiterated that internal disputes should not overshadow the party's primary focus on governance and national issues. "We’re asking the country to have the faith that they always have in the UDP to bounce back and form the government and deliver for the good of the people," he said, urging party members and the public to focus on broader political challenges rather than internal disagreements.
The UDP leadership's stance has been met with significant pushback from the Alliance for Democracy (AfD). The AfD counters that they have not resigned and argue that it is the UDP's leadership, specifically the Central Executive Committee (CEC) led by Peyrefitte, that is guilty of violating the party’s constitution. The AfD contends that the UDP leadership has ignored constitutional mandates, such as the provision that allows one-fourth of the delegates to petition for a National Convention to vote on new leadership. They claim that despite meeting the requirements for this petition, their efforts have been dismissed, undermining the UDP's constitutional processes.
UDP Party Leader Moses "Shyne" Barrow, however, defends the leadership's decision, citing the National Convention and National Party Council (NPC) vote last year that suspended leadership challenges until after the next General Election. He argues that this move was necessary to maintain party unity and avoid further internal division. Barrow and Peyrefitte maintain that the constitutionality of the decision aligns with efforts to stabilize the party and prepare for upcoming elections.
The conflict within the UDP highlights a broader debate about the interpretation and application of party rules. The AfD’s stance is that constitutional provisions must be adhered to strictly, especially when mechanisms for leadership recall are triggered and fulfilled. In contrast, the current UDP leadership focuses on maintaining stability and preventing factionalism, arguing that these are crucial for the party’s success in national governance.
Comments