Latest update February 22nd, 2025 2:00 PM
Latest News
- $277.9M Mabaruma Magistrates’ Court commissioned at Mabaruma
- Min. Indar scolds contractors over unsanctioned works days after VP Jagdeo called out ministry’s shoddy management of construction sites
- White House expects Ukraine to sign critical minerals deal soon
- Simplify cash grant distribution processes
- Peacemaker chopped after intervening in argument
Nandlall withdraws contempt case against Mingo, others
– Court imposes $450,000 cost
Attorney -at –law, Anil Nandlall yesterday withdrew the contempt of court case filed against Region Four Returning Officer (RO), Clairmont Mingo, and other Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) officials on the basis that the applicant did not hold sufficient evidence to have the respondents cited for breach of the Court order.
Attorney Anil Nandlall
Nandlall’s belated withdrawal did not sit well with Chief Justice (Ag) Roxane George- Wiltshire. Justice George –Wiltshire who has been presiding over the matter since March, chided the lawyer for wasting the Court’s time.
During the Supreme Court hearing conducted via zoom, yesterday the CJ announced that she had already prepared her ruling in the case.
The Judge stressed too that Nandlall had the opportunity on numerous occasions to indicate early on his intention to withdraw but chose to do so at last minute when she was ready to proceed with her ruling.
The Chief Justice emphasized that the case was indeed very deficient and imposed court in the sum of $450,000 on the applicant in the matter.
The applicant, Reaz Holladar, a client of Nandlall’s is dead, hence the Court appointed his wife, administrator of his estate for the purpose of satisfying the judgment.
The case surrounds orders of the court that are alleged to have been intentionally breached by Mingo.
Region Four RO Clairmont Mingo
Chief Justice Roxane George- Wiltshire
According to the application of contempt filed, Mingo is accused of acting in violation of the ruling by Chief Justice Roxane George- Wiltshire by refusing to ascertain the votes recorded in favour of the lists of candidates in accordance with the Statement of Polls (SOP).
He is also accused in the document of failing to commence compliance with section 84(1) of the Representation of the People Act.
Further, Mingo is accused of failing and/or refusing to ascertain the votes recorded in favour of each list of candidates in accordance with the statements of poll, “but instead, chose to use a pre-prepared spreadsheet, as the basis for the ascertaining and adding up of the said votes.”
The application purports the respondents to be Mingo; Chief Elections Officer, Keith Lowenfield; and the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) through its servants and agents; GECOM Chair, Claudette Singh, and the three government-nominated Commissioners, Vincent Alexander, Desmond Trotman and Charles Corbin.
It requests an order that the respondents stand committed to the Georgetown Prison or such place of confinement for one month, and a fine of no less than $750,000 for being in contempt of the Court.
However, in seeking to have the matter terminated, Nandlall yesterday accepted that his client did not have sufficient evidence of contempt against the RO, Chief Election Officer nor the Chairperson to have any of them committed to prison.
In his notice of withdrawal prior to the hearing, the lawyer had conceded that the matter was drawn up and filed under very exigent circumstances on March 12, 2020 when the respondents were in the process of violating the orders made by the Court the previous day.
In those pressing circumstances, Nandlall noted that the important, relevant and probative evidence was not available and was not included in the application at the time.
“The most egregious violations of that order happened on March 13, 2020, that is after the filing of the application.
The national recount exercise conducted by the respondents has unearthed vast volumes of relevant probative evidence which were not available at the time of filing and would have greatly assisted the court in determining whether or not the aforesaid orders were violated.”
The lawyer noted nonetheless that his applications for leave to file supplementary affidavits to put before the Court this new volume of evidence which was not available prior were not favourably considered by the Court.
He noted that it was submitted that in the administration of justice that evidence be marshaled and placed before the Court in proper form.
“Our efforts to secure the leave of the court to file supplementary affidavits was not favourably considered and it contributed significantly to my client’s decision to withdraw the matter with a view of re-filing and placing before the court evidence mentioned above,” the attorney explained in a letter to the Chief Justice.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
The clock and the cloud
Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- Time, as the ancients knew, is a trickster. It slips through the fingers of kings and commoners... more
CARICOM Nations Should Respond Together To new U.S. Policies
By Sir Ronald Sanders Ambassador to the US and the OAS, Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News-Two Executive Orders issued by U.S.... more
Weekend Cartoon
