Latest update November 23rd, 2024 1:00 AM
Latest News
- No time for referendum before 2025 elections – GECOM CEO
- Nandlall slaps ‘Melly Mel’ with $100M libel lawsuit
- Brutus now on $17.25M bail for 252 charges
- Truck driver in deadly Sheriff St. accident on $500k bail
- Govt. now looking at joint venture agreements to curb rent-a-citizen scheme – Director of Local Content Secretariat
CJ throws out remaining Election Petition case
- says GECOM acted in accordance to law
Chief Justice (Ag), Roxane George-Wiltshire, S.C.
Chief Justice (Ag), Roxane George-Wiltshire, S.C., has thrown out the only remaining election petition case filed on behalf of the APNU+AFC party to challenge the legality of the March 2, 2020 Regional and General Elections.
Justice George-Wiltshire dismissed the case ruling inter alia that the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) acted in full compliance with the Constitution of Guyana and electoral laws in its conduct of elections.
The case, filed under the name Petition #88, by petitioners Claudette Thorne and Heston Bostwick sought to challenge Section 22 of the Election Laws Amendment Act (ELAA) and Order #60 of 2020 which is the recount order created based on Article 162 of the Constitution on the grounds that they were unconstitutional and resulted in breaches and violations by GECOM with its conduct of the elections.
The parties have argued that the results of the elections were to be deemed invalid due to serious non-compliance with the Constitution of Guyana and electoral laws as regards the holding of the elections.
However, in her ruling, the Chief Justice (Ag) noted that neither Section 22 of the ELAA nor Order #60 is outside the realm of the Constitution. Justice George-Wiltshire held that the intent of Order #60 was to resolve irregularities, discrepancies, and anomalies occurring in the elections process and to determine a final credible count.
She noted that Section 22 is meant as an aid to the process to permit a determination of a result. It does not permit usurpation of the High Court’s jurisdiction under Article 163 [of the Constitution] at all.
“Section 22 provides the parameters for its efficacy, and the power granted therein is not arbitrary. It includes sufficient mechanisms to establish that Parliament did not surrender or abdicate its powers. Thus, I hold that there was a lawful delegation of power as provided for in Section 22 so that GECOM could independently and properly control the election process…” the CJ added.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
No time for referendum before 2025 elections – GECOM CEO
GECOM’s Chief Elections Officer (CEO) Vishnu Persaud Kaieteur News- No referendum can be held before the 2025 General and... more
No time for referendum before 2025 elections – GECOM CEO
GECOM’s Chief Elections Officer (CEO) Vishnu Persaud Kaieteur News- No referendum can be held before the 2025 General and... more
Weekend Cartoon
