Guyana Court of Appeal rules that key election petition appeal must go ahead

Last Updated on Monday, 3 October 2022, 11:16 by Denis Chabrol

The Guyana Court of Appeal on Monday agreed to urgently appeal of a 19-month old High Court decision of an election petition by the opposition A Partnership for National Unity+Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC).

Despite objections by Attorney-at-Law Douglas Mendes, for the People’s Progressive Party Civic’s representative of the list of candidates Bharrat Jagdeo, that lawyers for the appellants took 19 months before taking steps to have the hearing fast-tracked.

Presided over by Chancellor of the Judiciary Yonette Cummings and Justices of Appeal Dawn Gregory and Rishi Persaud, the Guyana Court of Appeal dismissed Mr Mendes’ arguments and said the appeal should be heard. “A party or an applicant should not be turned away from the seat of justice given the nature of this matter and, therefore, in the interest of justice we will grant the application, as filed or sought by Mr Forde,” Justice Cummings said.

That election petition seeks to nullify the results of the March 2, 2020 because of non-compliance with Guyana’s constitution and electoral laws related to the conduct of those polls by the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM).

The Guyana Court of Appeal has set November 1, 2022 for the status of the records including the full judgement by Chief Justice Roxane George-Wiltshire.  The court also gave Mr Forde seven days from October 3 to serve the notice of appeal on the other parties.

In applying for a speedy hearing of the appeal, Mr Forde- on behalf of the applicants Heston Bostwick and Claudette Thorne- he told the court that 19months after the decision, there was only a draft transcript of the Chief Justice’s decision. “We would have suffered a substantial prejudice by the failure to have the full decision made and laid over to the court” as well as for the notice of appeal and the record of appeal to be properly laid over

But Mr Mendes said that while he appreciated that the appeal ought to be heard urgently as it affects the composition of the National Assembly, the parties concerned and the entire electorate, “there would have been no resistance” if the application had been made by May 31, 2021 to make way for a possible further appeal to the Caribbean Court of  Justice (CCJ). Mr Mendes criticised the appellants for doing nothing until August 30, 2022 to formally ask for an urgent hearing. “My learned friend is blaming everyone except the appellants themselves,” he said, adding that possibly he was also blaming the Registrar and the Chief Justice although the transcript of the oral judgement is available from May 4, 2021. “There was nothing which prevented the appellant from drafting a Notice of Appeal and establishing the grounds of Appeal,” he said

He noted that was done on May 31, 2021, until the end of the 42 day period- and on June 1, the Registrar informed the Chief Justice of Appeal that an appeal had been filed and asked that the book evidence and book of exhibits provided. On March 17, 2022 wrote to the Registrar asking for an urgent hearing of the Notice of Appeal rather than move the Court of Appeal. “Effectively, nothing has been done,” he said.

Attorney-at-Law Forde described Mr Mendes’ reasoning as “fallacious” as he sought to rely on “rules that do not exist” in relation to the Court of Appeal. “There is no specific rule which exists under the Court of Appeal which says Mr Bostwick and Ms Thorne failed to comply with,” he said.

Mr Forde said the fault lies with the system as he and his clients have not received the full decision.

The Chancellor, in wrapping up Monday’s hearing, said whether the failure to conduct and prosecute that appeal was due to Mr Forde and his team or the judicial administration “would have to be investigated.” She noted Mr Mendes’ view that the transcript reflects the full judgement.

The appellants are contending that the Recount Order which facilitated the national vote recount was unconstitutional.