An attempt by the Attorney General, Anil Nandlall and Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo to join a High Court case filed by the APNU over breaches in the preparation for local elections has failed, with Acting Chief Justice, Roxane George denying their applications to join the matter.
“Neither of the parties, who seek to intervene, that is the Attorney General and Dr Jagdeo, while interested, will advance the case. Nothing in the affidavits indicated how they could assist the Court in addressing the issue, which is whether they have been breaches of Article 72 and Section 3 (1) (a) and (b) of the Local Authorities Elections Act,” the Chief Justice said as she handed down the ruling this morning.
Chief Justice George said to permit the interventions would delay the case. She pointed out that Local Government Elections, in effect, will commence on Friday, June 2, 2023, with voting by the Disciplined Services, followed by the general populace on June 12.
Ahead of her ruling, Minister Nandlall told the Court that at a minimum, the Attorney General ought to be heard as the principal legal adviser to the Government.
He warned that the case could have grave implications for a pending Election that has far advanced with respect to preparations for polling day, and the Attorney General should be heard.
“My presence is simply to put to the Court certain important legal issues that I believe is in the public interest,” the Attorney General said.
The Vice President’s Attorney, Sanjeev Datadin, in his defence, told the Court that the orders sought in the substantive matter would directly affect his client as well as his party – the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) – if granted, and as such, he should be heard before a decision is arrived at.
“The PPP/C has contested across the country and have expended resources…They are perspective persons, who are up for election, they are contesting the election, any decision that is being made that will affect the elections itself, the holding of the elections, the manner of holding of the elections, would have an effect on any person that is participating,” Datadin reasoned.
In response, the Chief Justice questioned whether or not GECOM was an independent Constitutional body capable of defending its position in the Court. Further, she said focus is often placed on the amount of money expended, in this case on the preparations of elections, however, the Court is more concerned about the legality of the matter.
“With all due respect, if what was done is unlawful that is what the Court is focused on…If what was done is unlawful, that’s it. It was unlawful, that is what the court has to focus on, and I think, we keep asking the Court to focus on, what I may call, tangential issues,” the Chief Justice said.
With the dates for Local Government Elections swiftly approaching, the Chief Justice is hoping to wrap up the case within days. The substantive application, which was filed by A Partnership National Unity (APNU) Chief Scrutineer Carol Smith-Joseph, is currently being heard.
Smith-Joseph is seeking an order to quash the decision of the Elections Commission to change 37 boundaries in 19 Local Authority Areas.
Smith-Joseph, through her Attorney Lyndon Amsterdam, is arguing that such a decision violates Article 72 of the Constitution, and as such, an order should be granted prohibiting the Elections Commission from holding Local Government Elections on June 12 with the new constituencies until it complies with the Constitution, and the Local Authorities (Elections) Act.
GECOM is being represented by its Legal Officer, Kurt Anthony Da Silva.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login