…but PPP lawyers want court to break the law
On Wednesday the Caribbean Court of Justice is expected to hand down its ruling on whether it has jurisdiction in the action brought by Irfaan Ali and Bharrat Jagdeo.
The two are challenging the ruling handed down by the Guyana Court of Appeal in the action brought by Eslyn David.
Ms David moved to the court to seek a declaration on what is a valid vote. The court ruled by a majority that the words “All votes cast” mean “all valid votes cast.”
Chief Elections Officer Keith Lowenfield tabulated his final report to the Guyana Elections Commission using the ruling of the Court of Appeal.
No sooner had he done this than Irfaan Ali and Bharrat Jagdeo moved to the Caribbean Court of Justice to nullify Mr. Lowenfield’s report.
They went further. They got a lawyer to file private criminal charges against Mr Lowenfield for malfeasance in public office. They contended that Mr Lowenfield’s report was fraudulently concocted.
This reported filing got wide publicity, which the PPP wanted. Up to Friday one newspaper aligned to the PPP reported that Mr. Lowenfield was heading to court for 9:00 hours.
I understand that they went to court without even serving the writ on Lowenfield.It had to be a publicity stunt. They know where Lowenfield lives; they know that he would be at the Guyana Elections Commission but they could not find him.
Meanwhile, the Caribbean Court of Justice met on June 30, last, to decide whether it had jurisdiction. That meeting which lasted some seven hours made me think about a man coming to buy my cow. He then set about asking me about my wife and my son.
If I expected to hear arguments about jurisdiction I was mistaken. I heard the court actually debate the motion by Jagdeo and Ali. It went further, there was a plaintive plea by Senior Counsel Ralph Hari Ramkarran.
Senior Counsel Ralph Ramkarran, in summing up his submission, made a bizarre appeal when he exhorted the CCJ judges to “take this material before you and PRONOUNCE on the elections results and bring this matter to a close once and for all.”
He asked the CCJ to order Lowenfield to withdraw his report. I am unaware of the power of the CCJ to accede to that request by Ramkarran.
This is outrageous and shocking from a senior counsel. However, it illustrates the desperation of the PPP case. The CCJ is not GECOM. The CCJ cannot PRONOUNCE and declare a winner of Guyana’s elections.
There is a clear matter of jurisdiction that is before the CCJ which is what it has to rule on, not PRONOUNCE on the Guyana elections as Ramkarran is urging them to do.
The PPP’s case before the CCJ is weak in law, relies on emotion, irrelevant hypothesis and seeks to inject a moral imperative.
The CCJ is not empowered or authorised to consider any of these and MUST strictly consider only the law and confine itself to the law.
Another PPP attorney (and we need to deliberately bundle all the PPP and small parties into one by referring to them as ‘PPP attorneys’) made a vulgar and brazen appeal to the CCJ, pressing the court to act outside its remit and outside the laws of Guyana.
He said, “This court (the CCJ) cannot simply say we are minded to deal with the legal issues. I ask this court to take a more broad purposive approach to its deliberations.”
This is absurd and ludicrous. A lawyer is asking the court, which must uphold the law, to act outside the law.
This is not a legal argument, this is wild, reckless, ‘rum shop’ gyaff.
Queen’s Counsel Reginald Armour, John Jeremie and Justin Simon along with Attorney General Basil Williams presented cogent, compelling arguments for the Coalition team.
They cited case law from various jurisdictions, a previous ruling of the CCJ and the view of a sitting CCJ Judge, Justice Winston Anderson.
Justice Anderson, according to Queens Counsel Armour, said that “if issues cannot be appealed to the CCJ, the CCJ cannot consider them.
“If the CCJ cannot consider them, then they cannot be included in the building blocks of the Court’s jurisprudence. It is that simple…”
QC Jeremie pointed out to the CCJ that the PPP was asking it “to defy the express terms of the Guyanese laws and the CCJ agreement” and to act beyond and outside of its remit which the CCJ clearly cannot do.
Queens Counsel Simon also submitted to the CCJ, citing the Laws of Guyana and the CCJ Act, that there can be no question that the Guyana Court of Appeal is the final court of jurisdiction and that there can be no appeal to the CCJ as the CCJ lacks jurisdiction.
Attorney General Williams submitted to the court the widespread fraud which was uncovered in the recount process.
The fraud included voter impersonation (dead people voting, migrated people voting), missing poll books, missing polling documents, unstamped ballots, more votes than electors, missing oaths of identity and other irregularities.
This case is plain and simple about Guyana sovereignty and Guyana’s right to settle its affairs in Guyana.
Caribbean Court of Justice does not have jurisdiction on this matter.
The Guyana Court of Appeal is the final court of jurisdiction on this matter and it has already delivered a ruling.
We await the CCJ ruling. The CCJ can only rule that it has no jurisdiction.
The GECOM Chair has to make the declaration. The CEO has already submitted his report based on the recount and the GECOM Chair must make the declaration based on the CEO report, nothing else.
But strange things happened during the last hearing on Wednesday.
The CCJ went beyond its stated mandate to determine jurisdiction. It entertained the actual appeal by the PPP. That was deliberate and prejudicial to the Coalition.
The CCJ constantly interrupted and disrupted the flow of the attorneys for the Coalition but spared the attorneys for the PPP. That was deliberate and prejudicial to the
Coalition.
If the CCJ overrides and or breach or amend the Guyana Constitution to exercise jurisdiction, it will be the death of the CCJ. Members who are sceptical in joining will be more sceptical and possibly never join.
The CCJ is aware that the Privy Council, its predecessor in Apex Court, over time, refrained from hearing election appeals. It is also aware that one of its own judges, Justice Anderson, stated that when Barbados, Guyana and Belize delinked from the Privy Council and joined the CCJ, that system of Privy Council refrain from elections petition was also transferred to the CCJ.
Yet, the CCJ went beyond the jurisdiction point and heard matters relating to the unappealable appeal.
