Attorney-at-law Nigel Hughes yesterday stated that his clients facing elections fraud charges continue to be denied their right to a fair trial as their case has been prolonged for three years.
He was referring to the case involving defendants: former Chief Election Officer, Keith Lowenfield; Deputy Chief Election Officer, Roxanne Myers; and Region Four Returning Officer, Clairmont Mingo; who are currently before the courts for alleged electoral fraud committed during the 2020 polls, which has now been adjourned to October 25.
“Now the matter has been put down for another two weeks, and these defendants have been coming here in an excess of three years without the prosecution being able to start their case and this I believe is an infringement on their right to a free trial” the attorney declared.
The trio appeared at the Georgetown Magistrate’s Court yesterday before Senior Magistrate Leron Daly with the expectation that their trial would be heard but this was held in abeyance due to the beginning of the October 2023 session of the Demerara Assizes.
Hughes, one of the legal representatives for the trio, told the media yesterday that Special Prosecutor Darshan Ramdhani lobbied for all cases to be heard together which the court deemed impossible.
“The court explained to him that it would be virtually impossible for the senior magistrate to hear all 118 cases at the same time considering the number of cases yet for hearing”, Hughes said.
He related that the prosecutor informed the court of his request to retired Chief Magistrate Ann McLennan for a special magistrate to hear all these matters to which he (Hughes) objected and reasoned that it was impossible for all cases to evidently be tried at the same time.
He said that a matter which has been ongoing for three years now languishes as it is still to be decided whether a dedicated court or magistrate would be appointed to sit and hear the case, with the exclusion of other matters.
The Attorney noted that Ramdhani also attempted to instruct Magistrate McClenan to write a letter to Chancellor of the Judiciary Yonette Cummings Edwards requesting that a magistrate be assigned to hear the case to which Hughes objected as being unprincipled.
“It is not the function of the chief magistrate to write to chancellor to ask about anything in that regard. We made it clear that this was a sophisticated attempt to have an adjournal because he [the prosecutor] came to court knowing that he didn’t write the chancellor, which was an indication that he could not proceed.”
Hughes acknowledged that he was a bit disappointed that no progress was made at yesterday’s court hearing but expressed confidence that justice will take its course.
Meanwhile, Ramdhani in an interview with NCN on Tuesday provided an update following the case management hearing, which was intended to address preliminary concerns.
In the interview, he emphasised that given the magnitude of the case at hand, it is expected to consume considerable time and court resources.
“It became apparent that many days would have to be set aside to try such a matter. It would take a considerable time because we have nine defendants and there would be a lot of cross-examination, which is a part of these matters. These are incidents of a fair trial. We had disclosed over 140 statements, we have close to 100 witnesses, we have tons of documentary evidence, we have a number of video evidence that has been disclosed to the other side,” Ramdhani said.
“I believe that the magistrate has recognised that the proper course will be to have this particular issue determined as to whether the court will be put in a position where they have to deal with every criminal case that it has on its docket, or whether a court will be properly authorised to prioritise this case,” he noted.
He explained that the court does not have the power to determine that it shall relinquish other matters to dedicate itself to this case.
However, such a power is in the hands of the Chief Magistrate, and the Chancellor of the Judiciary.
“If this court is to commence these matters, having regard to the fact that this court is dealing with other cases, one can understand the agony that the court, the defendants and the people will go through. Justice must be balanced, and fair to the public, because it is in the interest of the public that crimes are prosecuted fairly, and a just outcome is arrived at,” Ramdhani explained.
In March of last year, the state had written to the Chief Magistrate requesting that consideration be given to having the matters heard altogether, as well as to have a single magistrate assigned to focus on the case.
He said that the prosecution will formally write to the Chancellor of the Judiciary (ag), Justice Yonette Cummings-Edwards, to request that consideration be given to this matter.
This newspaper reported that Lowenfield, Myers, and Mingo, have been called repeatedly to defend themselves against a litany of charges related to their actions following the March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections (GRE).
The CEO is already facing three charges of misconduct in public office and three counts of forgery while Myers faces two counts of misconduct in public office. Mingo has been individually and jointly charged with forgery and conspiracy to defraud.
He was charged along with PNCR Chairman, Volda Lawrence, with one count of conspiring to commit fraud. Individually he is charged with four counts of misconduct in public office and also jointly charged with APNU+AFC agent Carol Joseph with one count of forgery. He further faces two counts of conspiracy to defraud.
It is alleged that following the March 2 GRE, Mingo and others conspired to rig the results of the Region Four elections in favour of the incumbent APNU+AFC.
The dispute over the Region Four count led to a painstaking 35-day recount scrutinised by CARICOM, the Organization of American States, and local observers. It also resulted in several protracted legal cases which were eventually adjudicated by the Caribbean Court of Justice. Following all this, the PPP/C was declared winner of the 2020 elections and Mingo and others placed before the court.
A number of other GECOM employees are also facing elections fraud charges.
