In language reminiscent of what had been employed in the motion of no confidence case when it ruled that 33 was the majority of 65, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) today said that Article 177 (2) (b) of the constitution was pellucid and required no interpretation.
Article 177 (2) (b) says “Where there are two or more Presidential candidates, if more votes are cast in favour of the list in which a person is designated as presidential candidate than in favour of any other list, that Presidential candidate shall be deemed to be elected as President and shall be so declared by the Chairman of the Elections Commission acting only in accordance with the advice of the Chief Election Officer, after such advice has been tendered to the Elections Commission at a duly summoned meeting”.
Delivering a summary of the court’s decision, President of the panel, Justice Adrian Saunders said “Article 177 (2) (b) in fact required no refinement. That article in plain and simple language has always said what it meant and meant what it said. There was no need for interpretation of that article or any other article of the constitution”, he said, adding that the Court of Appeal “lacked jurisdiction” in terms of the application that had been made to it by Eslyn David.
He said that the article used by the majority of the Court of Appeal panel to introduce the word “valid” in the context of the recount and the election of a President was not applicable. That article, Justice Saunders pointed out, pertained to the qualification to be elected as a President or for the interpretation of the constitution.
Justice of Appeal Dawn Gregory and Justice Brassington Reynolds had ruled in favour of admitting the term “valid” while Justice of Appeal Rishi Persaud had dissented.
