Despite stringent objections from several respondents, the appellant in the case of Misenga Jones vs the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) et al was yesterday granted a 24-hour stay on the effect of the Court of Appeal’s dismissal of the case. The 10 minutes during which this matter was discussed saw several incredulous outbursts and a reversal of an initial ruling on the matter,
“Nothing has been granted there is nothing to be stayed. All that has happened is a dismissal of a frivolous and vexatious appeal. The work of GECOM must be completed if we continue like this when will we have elections results 2025? This is untenable,” a clearly frustrated Kim Kyte-Thomas appearing for the GECOM Chair declared.
She was responding to attorney for the applicant Roysdale Forde who requested that the Court grant a three-day stay so that he and his battery of co-counsel could “consider the way forward.”
Immediately the bench consisting of Justices Dawn Gregory, Priya Sewnarine-Beharry and Rishi Persaud called for him to explain if he was asking for a “stay on a dismissal”.
Counsel for the People’s Progressive Party/Civic, Anil Nandlall later expanded on this question to note that since the Court had not granted any orders “there is simple nothing to stay.”
Kyte-Thomas endorsed his argument and called for the matter to be resolved so that GECOM could move on.
Attorney Sanjeev Datadin who represents the United Republican Party further argued that it would not be for the Appeal Court to grant a stay but for the Caribbean Court of Justice to grant either leave or special leave if the applicant were to file an appeal.
Yet another legal representative, Timothy Jonas on behalf of The New Movement (TNM) maintained that since the Court has recognized the appeal as an abuse of process they should deny the request for a stay.
“If you have before you an abuse of the Court process then by no stretch of the imagination can discretion be exercised [in favour of the applicant]” he stressed.
Following these submissions the Court ruled two to one to deny the requested stay. Justice Gregory noted, however, that she was inclined to grant a single day’s stay.
The Court moved on. That is until attorney Maxwell Edwards who appeared as co-counsel with Attorney General Basil Williams asked to be heard.
According to Edwards his “connection” to the virtual meeting cut out just as he was speaking. He initially ask to be allowed to speak so that his arguments could be added to the record.
Edwards argued that the Appeal Court had previously ruled in a matter brought by Caribbean Chemicals that it can grant a stay not just on Orders but also on declarations such as a dismissal.
Nandlall interjected that Williams should have allowed Edwards to speak before the decision to which the former magistrate belligerently responded that as co-counsel he did not need permission.
Justice Gregory noted that previously it was Kyte-Thomas who gave an undertaking on behalf of the Commission to maintain the status quo. She explained that the attorney having received a dismissal is no longer inclined to do so.
Edwards stressed that the Court could overrule Kyte-Thomas.
In the end Justice Persaud reversed his decision and agreed with Justice Gregory to grant the applicant 24 hours.
Justice Sewnarine-Beharry in response urged that the record reflect that her decision is to refuse the application for the stay.
