Remaining petition The petition is due to fail – RE
Attorney General (AG), Anil Nandlall, SC.
Kaieteur News – In a 22-page document presented to the High Court, the Attorney General (AG) and Minister for Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall, SC, explain that “the three-piece attack,” launched against the outcome of the March 2, 2020 elections, among other things, failed to defy the constitutionality of the election laws or the legality of a recounting order, which resulted in the victory of the Civic Progressive Party (PPP / C).
In short, the AG said that the remaining Elections Petition before the High Court was doomed to fail. Previously, the AG and his legal team had successfully challenged the validity of the first petition on the failure of the opposing parties to operate a service on the chief respondent, (former President David Granger) within the legal deadline.
In that petition, petitioners Claudette Thorne and Heston Bostwick asked the court to decide among other things, questions as to whether the elections have been held lawfully or whether the results have been, or could be, affected have been affected by and as a result of any unlawful act or omission. , whether the seats in the National Assembly are legally allocated.
In this case, however, petitioners Monica Thomas and Nurse Brennan argued that the elections were held unlawfully and / or that the results, (if held lawfully), were or could be affected unlawful acts or omissions affecting them.
In his response to the petition, Nandlall noted that, in this case, the candidates’ allegations were set out on three issues: is Section 22 of the Electoral Acts Amendment Act unconstitutional and is the recounting Order 60 invalid, void. and of no effect; the returning officer electoral division statement could not have been set aside; and GECOM’s actions were unlawful and trespassing under Article 163 of the Constitution.
Outlining a plethora of legal authorities and examples where the petitioners fail to prove their case, AG Nandlall explained that the opposing lawyers had failed to disprove the constitutionality of Section 22 of ELAA 2000 or established that Order 60 was in any way at all ultra vires or illegal.
Further, the AG noted the Elections petition allegedly filed in accordance with Article 163 of the Guyana Constitution and National Assembly (Validity of Elections) Act and there are no relevant facts in the case and no basis is laid in the petition . to establish any grounds on which the March 2, 2020 elections can be invigorated.
Nandlall emphasized that Article 163 (1) of the Constitution speaks to the jurisdiction of the High Court to decide questions relating to membership of the National Assembly and elections.
Further, he noted that a petition cannot be argued to challenge the conduct of the March 2, 2020 elections.
“This petition, therefore, falls into the second category of challenge, that is that an unlawful act or omission affected or affected the results of the elections. That unlawful act is Order 60 and the recount process, which flowed from it… A petition challenging an election on this last ground must establish not only that the act challenged was unlawful but that it was or could have affected on the results of the elections, ”Nandlall said in his presentations.
In addition, he said he had already submitted that Order 60 and the recount process were valid and lawful.
“Secondly, this petition fails to establish any satisfactory evidence that the said order 60 and the recount process have or may have affected the outcome of an election. The recount process simply repeated the cause of votes on polling day, ”continued Nandlall.
According to him there is no evidence before this court urging those votes to rule out re-counting. He also submitted, “There is no evidence of any variation between the first count that took place at the close of the poll and the count that occurred under Order 60. Indeed even if the recount and Order 60 are found to be unlawful there still must be no evidence that either or both of them have materially affected the election results ”.
The AG therefore concluded that the current petition was due to fail.