Appeal Court to hear challenge to GECOM chairman appointment on October 4 – Chancellor reiterates it is a matter of national interest

Jul 28, 2018 News

---

A challenge asking the Court of Appeal to overturn the decision of acting Chief Justice Roxane George, who ruled that Justice (retired) James Patterson was lawfully appointed as Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), will be heard on October 4.
This is the earliest date possible according to acting Chancellor of the Judiciary Yonette Cummings-Edwards, who made the announcement yesterday at the Court of Appeal at Kingston, Georgetown.
The hearing date is one month before the holding of Local Government Elections (LGE), which is slated for November 12.
On June, 8, the acting Chief Justice dismissed a challenge brought by People’s Progressive Party (PPP/C) executive member Zulfikar Mustapha to the unilateral appointment of Patterson as Chairman of the elections body.
Essentially, the acting Chief Justice ruled that under the Constitution of Guyana, President David Granger enjoys the right to reject the list of names provided by the Leader of the Opposition, and appoint someone from the judicial category as Chairman of GECOM, as provided for under Article 161 (2) of the Constitution of Guyana.
She therefore dismissed the application filed by Attorneys-at-law Anil Nandall, Manoj Narayan and Rajendra Jaigobin on behalf of Zulfikar Mustapha, and awarded cost in the sum of $250,000 to the State.
Arguments against the challenge were presented by Attorney General Basil Williams, Queen’s Counsel Hal Gallop and Queen’s Counsel Ralph Thorne, Solicitor General Kim Kyte and State Counsel Judy Stuart.
About a week after, lawyers for Mustapha filed an appeal challenging the acting Chief Justice’s refusal to deem Justice Patterson’s appointment unconstitutional.
The appeal was based on several grounds one of which included that the ruling of the acting Chief Justice has rendered the constitutional formula outlined in Article 163 of the Constitution of Guyana, as it regards to appointing a GECOM Chairman, as redundant, otiose and irrelevant.

According to Nandlall this section of the Constitution makes provisions for a Chairman of GECOM to be appointed by a joint exercise and a process that involves the joint input of the President and the Leader of the Opposition, Bharrat Jagdeo.
Mustapha, among other things, has further argued that Justice Patterson is not qualified for the post and that his appointment is null and void.
Back at the Court of Appeal yesterday, Nandall presented arguments to three appellate judges including the Chancellor, as to why the appeal should be treated with urgency, and that an early date should be set for hearing.
The Attorney General presented arguments to the contrary. Nandall in his address urged the court to act in a manner that is timely, and which protects the democratic right of every citizen, which according to him, is at stake should the matter be left lagging.
On the other hand, the Attorney General argued that his colleague’s arguments are premature.
The Attorney General is of the view that the High Court is the only court that has jurisdiction to deal with issues arising out of such circumstances, but only after the holding of elections, through an elections petition.
Delivering the ruling was the Chancellor who stressed that the appeal is one of national importance, noting that the court is mindful of other matters filed before this one.
She explained that it is known that matters of this nature are given preference by the court. According to the Chancellor the court is of the belief that the appeal should be heard within a relatively short space of time.

According to the Chancellor, “We are of the view that given the pending date for Local Government Elections and given the fact that there are matters, which will touch and concern the questions posed on the decision of the Learned Trial Judge, a hearing of the appeal should be conducted in a relatively short space of time.
Mustapha was granted on or before August 22, to prepare records of appeal and to submit written submissions by September 10. The State will reply on or before September 24.
The court further granted leave to both parties to file submissions in reply on or before October 1.
The appeal comes up for hearing on October 4.
The Chancellor urged the lawyers to adhere the timelines given by the court.
Reacting to the court’s ruling, Williams disclosed that should the Court of Appeal affirm the rule in favour of Mustapha, he is prepared to take the matter all the way to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).
“This is a matter that we feel strongly about. We think the President properly appointed the GECOM Chairman, and the Chief Justice confirmed that appointment. So we will have to deal with it.”
“The (Local Government) elections are afoot and the law tells you quite clearly that the court shouldn’t stop any election by an application made before an election because the volume of money and activities that would have already been spent and undergone. It would be more debilitating than progressive,” Williams told reporters.
Outside the court, Nandlall expressed satisfaction with the date given for hearing of the appeal filed by his client.
Nandall went on to say that taken into consideration that the court will be going into recess, “It is a date we will have to accept. Fortunately, the court recognized the importance of fixing a date for early hearing.
Had the court not done that, it is quite possible that a date would have been fixed very close to National Election which is due in May 2020.”
Nandall was reminded by reporters that Local Government Elections (LGE) have been fixed for November 12.
Responding, the former Attorney General pointed out that LGE is not as important as National Elections.
“It is the National Elections that we are absolutely concerned about. I am pleased that the court has recognised the importance of the issues, which this case deals with and the court has recognized the importance of hearing and determining those issues before the LGE.”
He added that the date for LGE “is not fixed in stones.”
Further, Nandlall stated that the Minister (of Communities) can always set another date for the holding of LGE, because it was originally fixed for December.
“So I don’t see any harm being done if the court rules in any particular way, which would cause the elections to be postponed.
Whoever, is aggrieved by the decision of the appeal, will have sufficient time to appeal to the CCJ and the CCJ will have sufficient time to deal with the matter certainly before general and national election in 2020,” Nandlall concluded.

 

 

 

---

---