AG Nandlall accuses Defence Attorneys of deliberately raising objections in Elections fraud case

AG Nandlall accuses Defence Attorneys of deliberately raising objections in Elections fraud case

Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Senior Counsel Anil Nandlall, has expressed concern once again over the slow pace of the election fraud cases in the Court.

Speaking on his Issues in the News television programme, Mr. Nandlall has taken a swipe at the Defence Attorneys in the case, accusing them of deliberately raising objections and using other tactics to not proceed with the trials.

“So, the first thing is the delay, as soon as the date is fixed for trial, the objection is made. Couldn’t it be made two years ago? Couldn’t it be made three years ago, of course it could have and these matters could have been ventilated and the trials could have been commenced but they waited until the last moment, why? Because there is a deliberate strategy, if not a conspiracy to delay these trials,” Mr. Nandlall stated.

Mr. Nandlall said an entire electoral cycle is about to be completed and there are still no interventions on the persons charged in relation to cases emanating from the last General and Regional Elections.

“So based upon the charge themselves three years now and over two years after statements were served on them, these lawyers must know and must have known what their defence will be. They have been talking to their clients three years now since the institution of the charge, and they would have read those statements two years so they would must know what their defence will be when the trial starts,” the AG said.

A number of former GECOM officials as well as officials from the Opposition APNU+AFC are facing various charges related to alleged electoral fraud. The matters have been crawling their way through the local Court system for more than three years. The accused have declared their innocence.

The Magistrate overlooking the case, recently referred an issue raised by the Defence Attorneys to the High Court for its interpretation and a decision.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login