The Alliance for Change (AFC) has registered its disappointment and frustration with the High Court ruling which threw out its election petition, but the party said it intends to respect the rule of law and the judgment.

In the wake of the ruling by Chief Justice (ag) Ian Chang which dismissed the petition because of a procedural flaw, the party issued a press statement yesterday saying a fundamental flaw exists in the legal system if a procedural technicality can set aside the will of the people.

AFC insisted it had won the disputed seat and it addressed the issue raised in the ruling about the late filing of the affidavit of service. AFC said it was optimistic that this technicality was not going to be so severe, especially “in the context of the principle that in contested disputes the merits of the issue should be dealt with”.

The party recalled a constitutional motion it had filed back in 2006, following the General Elections which sought declarations whether there was a lawful convening of Parliament when President Jagdeo had lapsed by several months in convening the Parliament. AFC said then Chief Justice Carl Singh had ruled that the President’s non-compliance of constitutional timelines, namely four months, was not so severe as to invalidate the convening of Parliament. According to the party, non-compliance then was held merely directory not mandatory.

The AFC had filed its affidavit of service ten months after the petition and Justice Chang held that its non-compliance in meeting the time requirement was so fundamental that it was mandatory and not directory.

The party said it notes “this contradiction” with the constitutional motion then and the elections petition recently dismissed. Further, it said the legal requirement stipulated no specific timeline for the filing (of the affidavit of service), but merely stated that it ought to be done shortly after the filing of the petition.

The AFC vowed to continue to fight for justice, free and fair elections and the freedom of the people to choose their own representatives. “An AFC win was clearly the result by the simple arithmetical computation of votes cast from the authentic Statement of Polls,” the party said while stating that its petitioner, Walter Melville was seeking to correct GECOM’s refusal to award the Region 10 seat to the party.

In addition, the AFC said that a set of preliminary points were argued jointly by lawyers for GECOM and the PPP/C to dismiss its just petition. According to the party, this was intended to stall the process for more than three years during which time the case file went missing but later reappeared.