Strong arguments made to throw out Coalition’s election petitions

AT the third hearing of the case management conference into the APNU+AFC’s Elections Petition, which seeks to challenge the validity of the March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections, Attorney-General, Anil Nandlall and Trinidadian Senior Counsel, Douglas Mendes, continued with strong arguments to have the petitions thrown out.

Mendes, who represents Vice-President, Bharrat Jagdeo, argued before the Chief Justice (ag), Roxane George, to have the petition thrown out since the second-named respondent, former President David Granger, who was listed as a representative of the A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) did not comply with Section 2 of the National Assembly Validity of Elections Act. They are contending that it was not filed within the timeline fixed by the law.

On November 10, Nandlall filed an interlocutory application to have the case struck out on the ground that it did not comply with Section 2 of the National Assembly Validity of Elections Act. It was not filed within the timeline fixed by the law, he is contending. The interlocutory application is being treated as part of one of two election petition cases before the High Court. Recently, Granger, through his lawyers, gave notice of intentions not to oppose the petition by seeking to exclude himself from the proceedings.

The notice which was signed by Granger and dated November 26, read “take note that I the undersigned respondent do not intend to oppose the above petition pursuant to the provisions of section 27(1) (a) and (2) of the National Assembly (Validity of Elections) Act Cap 1:04 and rule 25 of the National Assembly (Validity of Elections) Rules Cap 1:04.”
Nandlall, during his submission raised the issue of defective service and also argued that by using the Act of National Assembly (Validity of Elections), Granger has acknowledged that he is a proper named party in the case at hand.

“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,” Nandlall argued.

The AG further said that “Mr. Granger has implicitly or rather, expressly accepted that he is a properly named respondent. That is what the section gives him the power to do…Any of the named respondents, including Bharrat Jagdeo or anyone else, have an option in the law to choose not to oppose the petition. And Mr. Granger has exercised that option. Mr. Granger cannot contend that he is not a proper party in the petition and then use a mechanism in the act that is directed to proper respondents. He cannot have it both ways, your honour.”

Mendes also echoed the same arguments as Nandlall. He argued that Granger’s attorney must show the court that there is no contention in the petition that conflicts with interests in order for them to achieve in their submission that Granger is not a necessary party.

Granger’s attorney, Basil Williams, stated that his client does not wish to oppose the petition but opted for the court to determine his status in the case.
On August 31, the Coalition, through its lawyer, Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde, filed documents on behalf of Claudette Thorne while Attorney Robertson filed his client’s Heston Bostwick’s documents on September 17.

The petitioners are asking the High Court to determine the legality of the March 2 elections and the results that led to the declaration and allocation of seats in the National Assembly.
Both petitions are seeking an order to direct the Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), Justice (ret’d) Claudette Singh, to declare former President, David Granger, the winner of the March 2, 2020, General and Regional Elections.

Other attorneys who are part of the case are Raphael Trotman, Olayne Joseph, and Trinidad Senior Counsel, John Jeremie. GECOM is being represented by Dominican Senior Counsel, Anthony Astaphan and local attorney, Arud Gossai.

The Coalition has named several respondents inclusive of Keith Lowenfield; Vice-President, Bharrat Jagdeo; and representatives of several political parties that contested the elections, as it wants the High Court to cancel the polls and order fresh elections within 90 days. Former President, David Granger is also named as a respondent.
The PPP/C emerged victorious in the March 2, 2020 elections following a recount exercise.

In the first CMC hearing, which was held last month, Douglas Mendes, who is representing Jagdeo, argued that the petition was null since his client was not served in accordance with the established procedures.