Granger’s notice will have no effect on application to strike out elections petition - AG

Granger’s notice will have no effect on application to strike out elections petition – AG

Nov 29, 2020 News

Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall S.C.

Kaiteur News – The move to issue a notice of intention not to oppose the Elections Petitions by former Presidential candidate of the A Partnership for National Unity +Alliance for Change (APNU+AFC) party, David Granger, will have no effect on the application by Attorney General (AG) and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall S.C to strike out the petition.
Nandlall shared this perspective during a Department Of Public Information interview about the Court case. According to Nandlall, the notice by Granger appears to be a desperate attempt by the Opposition camp to invalidate his application.He explained however, that his application to strike out the petition is based on the fact that Granger, a named respondent in the matter was served late.He stressed that the late/defective service is a fundamental issue covered by the law and in such circumstances, the Court has no jurisdiction to hear the elections case.Stressing that the late service is fatal to the opposition’s case, Nandlall said that “Perhaps the lawyers are hoping that by getting Mr. Granger to put in the notice not to oppose the petition, then my argument on the point of Mr. Granger’s late service becomes mute and invalid. Perhaps they think they can circumvent a proven deficiency by this notice but they are wrong.”
In this regard, the AG explained that the notice not to oppose the election petition relates to a completely different aspect of the law.

Former Presidential candidate of the APNU+AFC party, David Granger.

“They are mutually exclusive concepts …so if they think this notice somehow evaporates my application, they are completely mistaken,” he stressed.
Additionally, the AG noted the lack of coordination among the lawyers for the petition has led to confusion on several points in the matter.
“Clearly there is some degree of confusion among the ranks of lawyers, because one is objecting to exactly what the other did, so clearly there is an implosion… Is it that they are not speaking to each other, or to their clients? Is it that they don’t understand the law? One begs to question” Nandlall said adding, that he is confident that his argument will be upheld when the matter is finally ventilated.
Last Thursday, Granger indicated by way of notice to the Court that he will not oppose the Elections Petitions, which challenges the results of the March 2, 2020, Regional and General Elections.
According to a Notice seen by Kaieteur News, the move is in keeping with provisions of Section 27(1) (a) and (2) of the National Assembly (Validity of Elections) Act Cap1:04 and rule 25 of the National Assembly (Validity of Elections) Rule Cap1:04; provisions which cater for withdrawal from the proceeding.
Section 27(1) (a) of the Act states, “that if before the trial of an elections a respondent other than the Chief Elections Officer (CEO) gives the prescribed motive that he does not intend to oppose the petition… the Registrar shall give notice thereof in the prescribed manner …”
Part Two (2) of the section further notes that, “a respondent who has given the prescribed notice that he does not intend to oppose the petition or for whom any person has been substituted shall not be allowed to appear or act as a party against the petition in any proceedings thereon.”
The notice comes days after the lawyers embroiled in the case argued over the application by attorney Mayo Robertson to have Granger struck from the list of respondents in the matter.
During those proceedings, Robertson, who represents one of the petitioners in the matter, held the view that Granger is not a necessary part in the case and should be struck off. Lead attorney for Jagdeo, Douglas Mendes S.C, argued nonetheless that the issues are bound up together and should be ventilated together.
“If the court decides that Mr. Granger is not a necessary party, then he will be struck out only from the proceedings but if the court decides that he is a necessary party, then the entire petition will need to be struck out…” he said.