Appeal to strike out elections petition for hearing next month

Aug 16, 2016 News

A full court hearing is scheduled to take place on September 6 at the Georgetown High Court in relation to the summons filed to strike out the Elections Petition.
The Petition filed on behalf of the People’s Progressive Party Civic, (PPP/C) seeks to challenge the validity of the outcome of the 2015 General and Regional Elections.
The applicant – Opposition Member of Parliament, Ganga Persaud – who was appointed Elections agent on the list of candidates for the PPP/C, had claimed that the elections were “unlawfully conducted” and that the result of the elections were affected or might have been affected by unlawful acts or omissions.
The application was challenged by Chief Elections Officer (CEO) of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), Keith Lowenfield, via a summons.
Retired acting Chief Justice, Ian Chang subsequently ruled that the summons to strike out the Petition was premature and therefore the Court should proceed in hearing it.
However Lowenfield, through his attorney Roysdale Forde, filed an appeal against Chang’s decision. This was done on 14 grounds.
Notwithstanding the full court hearing in three weeks, according to information obtained, it would appear that the substantive case of the Election Petition has been put on hold to facilitate the appeal of the summons.
Following the outcome of May 2015 elections, PPP/C Member of Parliament Ganga Persaud underscored that the elections were not held in conformity with the Constitution of Guyana and the Representation of the Peoples’ Act, Chapter 1:03. As such, the opposition essentially requested a recount of all ballot boxes for the last elections and fresh elections were also called for.
The PPP/C had claimed that the entire electoral process was flawed; that it contained many procedural errors and instances of fraudulent and/or suspicious actions.
“Unrest, fake Statements of Poll (SOPs) and multiple voting were among several causes cited when the PPP/C filed its elections petition.”
The presence of “huge mobs” at several polling stations and other strategic places, particularly in Region Four, were also cited by the party as another cause for intimidation and fear which in turn “rendered it impossible for polling, counting agents and duly appointed candidates to carry out their duties and functions properly.”
He named the Chief Elections Officer, Keith Lowenfield, and leaders of the eight political parties, which contested the last elections, as respondents in the matter.
Lowenfield had noted that the Elections Petition discloses no reasonable cause of action, is frivolous and vexatious; embarrassing and oppressive and an abuse of the process of the Court.
In his appeal, Lowenfield’s Attorney Forde held that Chang erred in law when he failed to direct his mind to the Summons and to apply the proper principles applicable to the striking out of the Petition on the grounds.
Forde outlined that the learned Judge erred in law when he made a finding and determination with respect to Article 163 (1) of the Constitution of Guyana and its relationship with Section 42 of the National Assembly Validity of Election Act Cap. 1:04 without affording the Appellant an opportunity of responding to the said finding.”

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News