The legal challenge mounted by Forward Guyana Movement (FGM) against the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) came up for hearing today in the High Court before Chief Justice (acting) Navindra Singh.
The application was filed in the name of Krystal Hadassah Fisher who is challenging the practice of GECOM in excluding political parties from appearing on the ballots for national elections in regions where they have not submitted a list of candidates.
GECOM was represented by Arudranauth Gossai while Fisher was represented by Vivian Williams.
Attorney General Anil Nandlall applied and was permitted to be a party to the case. He argued that since the applicant is seeking constitutional relief against the State, the Attorney General must be named a party.
However, Nandlall told reporters that he declined to file an affidavit of defence and will rely on GECOM’s submissions.
According to Nandlall, this case is purely a matter of law and interpretation.
He said “it’s not a question of evidence” but a question of persuading the court of GECOM’s understanding of the Constitution and the Representation of the People Act (ROPA).
“We have a PR system, that you vote for a list of candidates and you are afforded one vote per list and that list of candidates must contest elections in the areas where the election is being contested. In Guyana’s case, there are ten geographic constituencies in which the election is being contested and you have to field a list on each of those geographic constituency, there is a minimum number of geographic constituencies that you are required to contest the election in to qualify to contest the elections…more fundamentally, the list that you are supporting must be contesting the election in the geographic constituency in which you are located or else you will not be able to cast your ballot for that list,” Nandlall explained to reporters.
According to the affidavit, both FGM and the Assembly of Liberty and Prosperity (ALP) party, were approved by GECOM to contest the general elections, however, FGM’s name was not found on the ballots in Regions Seven, Eight, and Nine, nor ALP in Regions One and Two. The parties did not submit lists for those regions in which they are excluded but argues that they satisfied all legal requirements to contest nationally by meeting the minimum requirement of geographic constituencies lists, which is six.
The applicant, a resident of Region Nine, claims that the exclusion of the parties from the ballot in that district violates citizens’ constitutional right to vote.
But Nandlall had previously posited that no right is absolute. “While you have a right to vote, it’s not an absolute right to vote. Every right has qualifications and restrictions. So, you have a right to vote but you must be registered. You have a right to vote for a political party of your choice, of course, but that party must be contesting the elections,” he had explained.
Meanwhile, the applicant’s lawyer maintains he has a solid case, telling reporters “where in the Constitution and where in the Representation of the People Act is says that if a party does not contest a geographic constituency it shall not appear on the ballots of that region?”
The matter comes up again tomorrow where the lawyers are expected to submit their arguments.
Justice Singh has committed to a swift ruling, expressing hope to have the case concluded this week.
Discover more from INews Guyana
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
