Speaking on the eve of the meeting called to discuss his recusal, Lavasa justified his insistence on having his minority view recorded in the Election Commission’s final orders. ” When asked why he decided to opt out of Commission meetings on MCC matters, he said, “The letter I wrote on the 16th (of May) is a culmination of more than a month’s communication and that process started on April 18. ” When asked why he insisted on having his minority view recorded in MCC orders even though that hasn’t been the practice in the past, he said: “My argument is that whereas Model Code of Conduct is a code, all orders that spell out consequences of a violation are issued under Article 324. Therefore, the Commission should spell out the reasons why a decision was made and if one of the Commissioners doesn’t agree, that person’s view should also be included in the order. On the criticism that his recusal can be perceived to be obstructionist, he said, “In case the decision is not unanimous, the majority view prevails and is implemented.
This news content is a computer generated summarized version of the original article and the authenticity of the original content has not been verified. Please click on the View Article button to refer to the actual content.