Noting the need for the expeditious hearing of election petitions, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) has set Tuesday July 19th to hear the appeal filed by Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo and Attorney General Anil Nandlall SC to the Guyana Court of Appeal’s ruling giving itself jurisdiction to hear the appeal of the dismissal of the Opposition APNU+AFC’s election petition which challenged the results of the March 2nd 2020 general elections.
With a view to ensuring that the matter is expedited, the Trinidad-based court of last resort for Guyana also set strict timelines to which the battery of attorneys involved in the action has been ordered to adhere, for the filing and serving of their submissions before the court and on each other.
At a case management conference (CMC) yesterday morning, Justice Jacob Wit who chaired those proceedings along with Justices Maureen Rajnauth-Lee and Winston Anderson, stressed that the timelines must be strictly followed, underscoring that election petitions are to be heard with expedience.
Against this background, and given what the Judge said are similarities in grounds raised by both Jagdeo and the Attorney General (AG) (the Appellants), to save time and for convenience, they have been ordered to file one joint record of appeal within a week’s time—on June 7th.
Seven days after—by June 14th, they are to file and serve their written submissions on the respondents; who thereafter, have been ordered to file and serve their submissions no later than June 28th.
The Court said that there is no need at this point for the filing of responding submissions.
Oral arguments are then set to commence at 10:00 am on July 19th and are expected to run for just over three hours.
Following the hearing, Justice Wit said it is the Court’s intention to render its ruling swiftly thereafter as well.
Dispensing with other house-keeping matters, Justice Wit said that there was an apparent uncertainty regarding who had been named Respondent for the Chief Election Officer (CEO) of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM)—pointing out that while in the AG’s appeal Keith Lowenfield had been so named—Jagdeo’s appeal had only recorded “the Chief Elections Officer.”
The Judge said that because of this uncertainty which existed, the Court’s Registry invited a representative for the current CEO of GECOM to at least be present in proceedings, since Lowenfield no longer holds the position of CEO of GECOM.
On the invitation of the Court, legal officer and Attorney-at-Law Kurt Da Silva appears for the current CEO.
Following the termination of Lowenfield’s contract of employment by the Commission, Vishnu Persaud was appointed and sworn in as the new CEO.
On December 21st, last, the local court of appeal in a majority 2-1 decision ruled that it has jurisdiction to hear the appeal of the petition. Chancellor Yonette Cummings-Edwards and Justice of Appeal Dawn Gregory concurred with each other, while Justice of Appeal, Rishi Persaud dissented.
Acting Chief Justice (CJ) Roxane George had previously thrown out the petition, after finding that presidential candidate of the APNU+AFC, David Granger was not served on time.
Monica Thomas and Brennan Nurse by whom the petition was filed, would later appeal through their battery of attorneys led by Roysdale Forde SC, to the Guyana Court of Appeal, arguing that the Chief Justice erred in law.
Jagdeo through his attorneys led by Senior Counsel Douglas Mendes, and Nandlall have argued, however, that since the CJ’s decision was not in relation to a final order of the Court it was incapable of being appealed.
Thomas and Nurse’s contention has been that the elections were unlawfully conducted and/or that the results (if lawfully conducted) were affected or might have been affected by unlawful acts or omissions. They nonetheless argue that from those polls it is Granger who should be declared the duly-elected President of Guyana.
The ruling of the local appellate court has been stayed until the hearing and determination of the appeal before the CCJ.
In the other of the two petitions filed by the Opposition, which is also before the Court of Appeal, petitioners Claudette Thorne and Heston Bostwick want the Court to determine, among other things, questions regarding whether the elections have been lawfully conducted or whether the results have been, or may have been affected by any unlawful act or omission and, in consequence thereof, whether the seats in the National Assembly have been lawfully allocated.
On April 26, 2021, Chief Justice George threw out that petition also brought on behalf of APNU+AFC challenging the results of the March 2nd 2020 general elections.
She found that the recount order and section 22 of the election laws act did not contravene the Constitution as had been argued by counsel for Thorne and Bostwick.
This matter is yet to be heard by the Guyana Court of Appeal.
