CCJ sets June 18 as “tentative date” for rulings in Guyana “no-confidence” Appeal cases

If the CCJ rules that the vote of no-confidence was properly passed against the Guyana Government, the Government will have to start preparations for early elections. If the Court rules that the motion was not properly passed, the Government will be able to hold on to office until the next constitutionally due elections, which should be before May of next year.

CCJ sets June 18 as “tentative date” for rulings in Guyana “no-confidence” Appeal cases

The Caribbean Court of Justice has informed the Attorneys in the Guyana no-confidence appeals before it, that the Court will be handing down its rulings next Tuesday, June 18.

The rulings come just over a month since the Attorneys in the matters wrapped up their oral arguments before the Judges of the CCJ.

Appeals in the matter were filed by Attorneys for Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo and Accountant and Attorney Christopher Ram following the Guyana Court of Appeal’s ruling that the no-confidence motion against the Government of Guyana was not properly passed.

It was the Guyana Government that had taken the case to the local Appeal Court after the High Court ruled against it.

At the CCJ also, Attorneys for the Attorney General of Guyana and a Berbice farmer also sought the CCJ’s interjection to deal with some aspects of the Appeal Court and High Court ruling in Guyana.

If the CCJ rules that the vote of no-confidence was properly passed against the Guyana Government, the Government will have to start preparations for early elections. If the Court rules that the motion was not properly passed, the Government will be able to hold on to office until the next constitutionally due elections, which should be before May of next year.

Just last week, the Attorneys for the Attorney General sought to introduce new evidence in the matter related to Charrandass Persaud, who was the Government Member of Parliament who sided with the Opposition to vote against the government in the no-confidence motion.

The evidence points to Persaud having previous knowledge that it was illegal for him to serve as a Member of Parliament in Guyana because of his dual citizenship. The Attorneys contend that his vote could not be legal since he was illegal in the House.

Persaud is a Canadian Citizen and sought the protection and escort out of Guyana from the Canadian Government after casting his vote against his own government.

The CCJ has denied the Attorney General’s request.

The CCJ is also expected to rule on the appointment of the Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission.

The High Court and the Appeal Court of Guyana had both ruled that the appointment was legal.

However, the Opposition Leader through his Attorneys took the case to the CCJ seeking a reversal of the rulings in Guyana and seeking to invalidate the appointment of the Chairman of the Elections Commission.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login