Appeal amounts to an abuse of court’s process – GECOM Chair

Jul 25, 2020 News

Elections declarations case…

Chairperson of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), retired Justice Claudette Singh has called the latest appeal of the elections declarations case “frivolous”, “vexatious” and, among other things, an abuse of the Court’s process.

GECOM Chairperson retired Justice Claudette Singh

In submissions filed by her Attorney-at-law, Kim Kyte-Thomas, the GECOM Chair called for the appeal to be dismissed on the ground that it lacks merit.
Kyte-Thomas is expected to present oral arguments on behalf of the Chair when the appeal case commences at 10:00 hours today. In her written submissions filed with the Appeal Court, the lawyer outlined several grounds on which the matter should be dismissed.
In keeping with her original contentions, she stressed that the Appeal Court challenge should not be permitted at this point in time. According to Kyte-Thomas, while it is obvious that the intention of the appellant is to have the election annulled on the basis of alleged irregularities, any applications of this nature is a hindrance to the electoral process.

Attorney-at-law Kim Kyte-Thomas

“I submit,” the attorney argued, “that this can only be addressed by way of an Election Petition. Any challenge to the validity of an election and any dispute or claim of any irregularities or illegalities in relation to an election can only lawfully form the basis of an Election Petition after the result has been declared.”
She further submitted that the findings and decision of the Chief Justice (ag) Roxane George-Wiltshire represent long-established jurisprudence of electoral laws and the electoral regime in respect to the issues raised in the appeal.
Kyte-Thomas’s submissions are in keeping with a ruling by Chief Justice (CJ) Roxane George-Wiltshire in case filed by Misenga Jones, a National Elections Recount counting agent for A Partnership for National Unity+Alliance For Change,(APNU +AFC), to block a declaration based on the recount figures which show the opposition People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) winning the elections.
The Chief Justice had dismissed Jones’s application to invalidate the national recount, given that the reliefs sought were already decided in previous litigation by the Court of Appeal and the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). The CJ, in her ruling, had stated categorically that, “persons cannot be allowed to waste the time and resources of the Court to revisit issues already sufficiently adjudicated.”
Key grounds in which the CJ rooted her decisions were the principles of stare decisis and res judicata.
The first principle requires a Court to premise its litigation on precedents, and the latter dictates that if a matter has been adjudicated by a competent court, it cannot be re-litigated. She had pointed out too that litigation on this matter has substantially contributed to the protraction of Guyana’s 2020 electoral process for four and a half months.
In her ruling, the CJ noted that, “There must be finality to judicial decisions.” She noted that, “Myriad persons cannot be permitted to engage the court with multiple applications regarding the same issue which has been decided, and shield behind the claim that they were not a party to the previous proceedings. To so permit would be to waste precious judicial time and resources. In short order – this cannot be allowed.”
Despite those details of the CJ’s adjudication, Roysdale Forde, attorney for Jones announced, moved to appeal the ruling shortly after. That appeal was accompanied by a cross –appeal tendered on behalf of Attorney General, Basil Williams, who is also an executive member of the incumbent APNU+AFC.