|
|
|
|
| JANUARY
03, 2004 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Grenada's 30th Anniv. of Independence "recognising our worth, celebrating our achievements, exploring new frontiers" | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JAN 03 |
THE
GEORGE PRIME PETITION |
OTHER
STORIES |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
January 8 is the date set for the hearing of the election petition filed by Deputy Political Leader of the main opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC), George Prime against the result in the November 27 election for the Carriacou & Petite Martinique constituency. Informed sources told GRENADA TODAY that the matter would be heard by female high court judge, Justice Chairmaine Pemberton in the Number Two High Court.
Prime is challenging the decision of Supervisor of Elections, Victor
Ashby to declare Foreign Affairs Minister, Elvin Nimrod of the ruling
New National Party (NNP) as the victorious candidate in the poll. The NNP is currently holding onto office with a slim 8-7 majority over the Congress party. In the election petition suit, Nimrod is identified as the first Respondent, with Ashby as the Second respondent and Brenda Samerson, the Returning Officer for the constituency as the Third Respondent. According to a well-placed source, top Barbadian lawyer, Elliot Mottley, Q.C, would be joining the three-member local defense team of Carol Bristol, Q.C, Lloyd Noel and Ruggles Ferguson for the court hearing. When approached the Supreme Court Registry declined to make copies of the petition filed by Prime available to the local media on the grounds that instructions were given "to keep it under lock and key". However, this newspaper was able to obtain a copy of the petition and as a public service has decided to publish the main highlights of the 14-page document: The Petition of George W. Prime, of Hillsborough, Carriacou in the State of Grenada shows that: 1.That the Petitioner, is a person who was validly nominated as a candidate for the constituency of Carriacou and Petite Martinique and claims to have a right to be elected and returned at the Parliamentary election held on the 27th day of November, 2003
2. The First Respondent was a validly nominated candidate for the said constituency of Carriacou and Petite Martinique and is the First Respondent herein. 2A.
The First Respondent was the validly nominated candidate for the New
National Party (hereinafter referred as 'the NNP") for the said
constituency and, following the said elections, was declared by the
Second Respondent to have been duly elected. 3A. The Second Respondent is the Supervisor of Elections for the state of Grenada, having been duly appointed by the Governor General, pursuant to Section 35(2) of the Grenada Constitution, and is charged with the duties and functions vested in him by Section 35 of the said Constitution. 4. Brenda Samerson is the Returning Officer and is the Third Respondent herein. 4A. The Third Respondent is, and was at all material times, the Returning Officer for the said constituency. 5. The polling divisions herein after referred to are all polling divisions in the said constituency. 5A. The said constituency is comprised of eleven polling divisions, designated sequentially as A01 to A11. The polling divisions hereinafter referred to are all polling divisions in the said constituency. 6. In the said general election on the final count by the Third Respondent, the First Respondent received 1430 votes, the Petitioner received 1424 votes and the other candidate, 5 votes. The First Respondent was declared the duly elected candidate by the Third Respondent. 6A.
On the purported final count by the Third Respondent, in the said elections
the First Respondent was alloted 1430 votes, the Petitioner was alloted
1424 votes and the other candidate, 5 votes. The First Respondent was
declared the duly elected candidate by the Third Respondent, the Petitioner
having been deemed to have lost by six (6) votes. That in the holding of the said election divers breaches of the rules governing the conduct of the election were committed by Brenda Samerson, the Returning Officer, the Third- Respondent and/or her servants or agents in that: (i) The Third Respondent failed to make any or any proper arrangements for ensuring that the ballot box in Polling Division 10 in the said Constituency was properly secured and therefore was in breach of her duty. The
statement of the poll after the ballot was as follows: At the final count of the said ballots, 213 ballots were found in the envelope for the First Respondent, notwithstanding that only 358 persons voted at the said election. Subsequently, a search for the missing ballot was done on the 28th day of November, 2003, by the Presiding Officer, Albert Fortune in the presence of the agents for the Petitioner and the First Respondent, and a police officer, but this ballot was not found. (ii) The addenda to the final electoral list prepared by the Second Respondent was arbitary in that several persons including Veronica Roberts (polling division 1), Benedict Andrews (polling division 3), Faith Samuel, Ann Lawrence (polling division 5) and Louisa Matheson (polling division 8) appeared on the addenda and voted at the said election whereas Clara Thomas (polling division 2), Michael Quashie, Sherri Samuel (polling division 3) Ann Louisa Rullow (polling division 6) Catherine Joseph, Augustine James, Catherine Clement, Risha Sylvester, John Bedeau (polling division 9), Evelyn Noel (polling division10) and who were qualified to be included in the addenda were not so included and therefore were disfranchised. BREACHES BY THE SECOND AND THIRD RESPONDENTS 7A. On election day, the Second and Third Respondents, whether by themselves, their servants and/or agents, committed several acts in clear contravention of the Representation of the People Act, 1993, and all other Rules, Regulations and Laws governing the conduct of the said elections, creating in the process, an unfair disadvantage to the Petitioner and a distinct advantage to the First Respondent, in that: (i) On Election day five (5) well known supporters of the New National Party, namely, Veronica Roberts (polling division 1), Benedict Andrews (polling division 3), Faith Samuel, Ann Lawrence (polling division 5) and Louisa Matheson (polling division 8) had their names included on an addendum list of electors issues by the Supervisor of Elections. The inclusion of the said names followed arrangements made by the Third Respondent on that very day to have the said five (5) persons included in the said Addendum. As a result of the inclusion of their names in the said Addendum, the said persons became became eligible to vote and four of the five said persons (with exception of Veronica Roberts) actually voted on that day. (ii) In contrast to what is set out in paragraph 7(i) above, ten well known supporters of the National Democratic Congress, namely, Clara Thomas (polling division 2), Michael Quashie, Sherri Samuel (polling division 3) Ann Louisa Rullow (polling division 6) Catherine Joseph, Augustine James, Catherine Clement, Risha Sylvester, John Bedeau (polling division 9), Evelyn Noel (polling division10) showed up at their respective polling stations to cast their votes on election day but were unable to do so. These said ten persons were duly registered and had with them their Voter Identification Cards which had been issued by the Second Respondent. However the said ten persons were unable to cast their votes due the absence of their names from the Finally Revised List of Voters. Despite strenuous efforts made by the Petitioners and his agents to have the said ten persons included in an Addendum list of voters, the Second Respondents acting in concert with the Third Respondent, neglected or refused to issue such a list with respect to those ten persons. As a result, these said supporters of the National Democratic Congress were unable to vote. The Petitioner lost an opportunity to secure a further ten votes in his favour. (Iii) The arbitrary adding of the said five persons to the Addendum List of Electors as set out in paragraph 7 (i) above while deliberating excluding, or neglecting to include the said ten persons to the said Addendum as set out in paragraph 7(ii) above gave to the First Respondent, an unfair advantage over the Petitioner that was sufficient to affect, or to significantly affect, the final outcome of the election. Had the said ten persons been allowed to vote the First Petitioner could have won the election by four (4) votes. (iv) In Polling division A10, the Third Respondent failed to make any or any proper arrangements for ensuring that the ballot box in Polling Division A10 properly secured and therefore was in breach of her duty.
The statement of the poll after the preliminary count of the ballots
was as follows: Notwithstanding
the fact that only 358 persons were purported to have voted at the said
polling division, only 357 votes were accounted for in the final count
of the ballots. Subsequently, a search for the missing ballot was done
on the 28th day of November, 2003, by the Presiding Officer, Albert
Fortune in the presence of the agents for the Petitioner and the First
Respondent, and a police officer, but this ballot was not found. (i) Keeping open the NNP Coordinator's office which is situated within the 100 yard perimeter of polling division 11 which said office remained open throughout the course of the said election in breach of Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act 1993. (35/93) (ii) Cosnel Baptiste and Solomon Peters, two voters at polling division 6, voted at the said election by way of the procedure for the blind on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Baptiste, whose names appeared on the register of electors for the said constituency. The said Mr. and Mrs. Baptiste are not blind, but did not vote themselves. Accordingly, the said votes so recorded are void and ought now to be struck off the poll. (iii) Mrs. Cathyann Bethel voted at the said election at polling division 11 by way of the procedure for the blind on behalf of Ms. Ceilia Bethel whose name appeared on the register of electors for the said constituency. The said Ceilia Bethel is not blind, but did not vote herself. Accordingly, the said vote so recorded is void and ought now to be struck off the poll. (iv) At polling division 6, Cynthia Bartholomew, an outside agent for the New National Party (NNP), after voting remained within the one hundred yard limit of the said polling division campaigning on behalf of the (NNP) to persons arriving to vote contrary to Section 86 subsection 1 of the Representation of People Act 1993.(35/93) (v) Hyacinth Lewis also known as Hyacinth Perott was allowed to vote at the said election at polling division 10 notwithstanding; (1) The name Hyacinth Lewis or Hyacinth Perotte was not on the electoral list ; and (2) The objection by Ms. Theresa Joseph, an agent of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) of the said Hyacinth Lewis being allowed to vote in that manner ;and (3) That he voted either as John Lewis or Hanson Lewis who are persons known to be living outside Grenada and whose names appeared on the register of electors for the said constituency but who did not themselves vote, and the said vote as so recorded is void and ought now to be struck off the poll. (vi) Laurie Francis (aka "Sauce") was abducted on the night of the 26th day of November 2003 by two known NNP activists viz; David Augustine and Daniel Noel who secured the said Laurie Francis in an abandoned building overnight. On the morning of November 27th 2003 at approximately 5.15am, he was removed from the said abandoned house and taken to polling division 9 to vote. This vote so recorded is void and ought now to be struck off the poll. 8A.
Six (6) well known supporters of the New National Party were allowed
to cast votes on election day which ought to have been declared invalid,
those votes having been cast by way of procedures that were in contravention
of the Representation of the Peoples Act, 1993, or otherwise either
illegal, irregular or improper. (i) At polling division A06, two persons, namely, Mr. Matthew Baptiste and his wife, Mrs. Rossanna Baptiste, whose names appeared on the Finally Revised List of Electors for the said constituency voted by a way of a procedure reserved for blind persons, even though they were not blind. On that occasion, the votes of the said Mr. and Mrs. Baptiste were cast by two other persons, namely Cosnel Baptiste and Solomon Peters, respectively. Moreover, the said Cosnel Baptiste and Solomon Peters as well as the agent of the Third Respondent all, knew that Mr. And Mrs. Baptiste were not blind. Accordingly, the said votes so recorded are void and ought now to be struck off the poll. (ii) Similarly, at polling division A11, another person, namely, Ms Celia Bethtel whose name appeared on the Finally Revised List of Electors for the said constituency voted by a way of a procedure reserved for blind persons, even though she was not blind. On that occasion, the vote of the said Ms. Celia Bethel was cast by another person, namely Ms. Cathyann Bethel. Moreover, the said Cathyann Bethel as well as the agent of the Third Respondent, knew that Ms. Celia Bethel was not blind. Accordingly, the said vote so recorded are void and ought now to be struck off the poll. (iii) At polling division A10, Hyacinth Lewis also known as Hyacinth Perott was allowed to vote in the said election notwithstanding the fact that: (a.) The name Hyacinth Lewis or Hyacinth Perotte was not on the Finally Revised List of electors; (b) Ms. Theresa Joseph, an agent of the NDC objected to the said Hyacinth Lewis of the said Hyacinth Lewis being allowed to vote as another person;;and (c) The said Hyacinth Lewis voted either as John Lewis or Hanson Lewis who are persons known to be living outside Grenada and whose names appeared on the register of electors for the said constituency but who did not themselves vote. Accordingly, the said vote as so recorded in the name of John Lewis or Hanson Lewis, as the case may be, is void and ought now to be struck off the poll. (iv) At polling division A08 Oscar Blair voted using an identification card with the name John R. Bedeau but with a photograph of himself so as to personate and vote at the said election as and for the said John R. Bedeau, whose name appeared on the register of electors for the said constituency, but who did not vote himself. Accordingly, the said vote so recorded is void and ought now to be struck off the poll. (v)
At polling division A08, Chereka S. Matheson using an identification
card bearing her photograph with the signature of Glenn Fortune, who
is known to be living outside of Grenada, but who did not vote himself.
(vi) At polling division A10, a ballot which clearly indicated a vote for the Petitioner was rejected because the voter placed the "X" below the name and symbol of the Petitioner rather to the right of the said name and symbol.
That the First Respondent was or by his agent guilty of the corrupt practices of procuring the commission of the offence of personation during the said election contrary to the provisions of Section 90 of the said Act in that: i. The said Oscar Blair voted at the said election at polling division 8 using an identification card with the name John R. Bedeau but with the photograph of the said Oscar Blair, to personate and vote at the said election as and for the said John R. Bedeau, whose name appeared on the register of electors for the said constituency, but who did not vote himself. Accordingly, the said vote so recorded is void and ought now to be struck off the poll. ii. The First Respondent was or by his agent guilty of corrupt practices of procuring the commission of personation during the said election contrary to the provisions of section 90 of the said Act in that the said Chereka S. Matheson voted at polling division 8 using an identification card bearing her photograph on the card with the signature of Glenn Fortune who is known to be living outside of Grenada, but who did not vote himself. Accordingly, the said vote so recorded is void and ought now to be struck off the poll. iii. Elaine Simon, aged 86, who is reputed to suffer from senile dementia was collected by a group of men including Senator Eluthan Noel and was taken to vote in the said election at polling division 4. Accordingly, the said vote so recorded is void and ought now to be struck off the poll. BREACHES/CORRUPT PRACTICES BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT, HIS SERVANTS AND/OR AGENTS
The particulars of the said corrupt, illegal and/ or irregular practices by the First named Respondent are as follows:
(ii) At polling division A06, his agent, Cynthia Bartholomew, after voting, remained within the one hundred yard limit of the said polling division campaigning on behalf of the New National Party (NNP), to persons arriving to vote, contrary to Section 86 subsection 1 of The Representation of People Act, 1993. (iii)
At polling division A04, Elaine Simon, aged 86, who is reputed to suffer
from senile dementia was collected by a group of men including (then)
Senator Euthan Noel, a New National Party appointed Senator, and was
taken to vote in the said election. (iv) As regards polling division A09, Laurie Francis (aka "Sauce") was taken to vote there after being forcibly taken away the night before, against his wishes, by two well known NNP activists, namely, David Augustine and Daniel Noel. Francis was secured by the said activists in an abandoned building overnight, removed from the said abandoned building the following morning (Nov.27th) at approximately 5.15am and taken to polling division A09 to vote. Accordingly, the said vote is void and ought now to be struck off the poll. 10. The second and third Respondents acting in combination or concert willfully, maliciously or negligently, and wrongfully, illegally and in contravention of the Representation of the People Act, 1993, caused the First Respondent to be elected as the member for the constituency of Carriacou and Petit Martinique in that: (i) In Polling Division A10, the statement of the poll after the preliminary count of the ballots was as follows: First Respondent - 214 votes, Petitioner - 142 votes; Rejected - 02 votes (a total of 358 votes). When on November 28th the final counting of the votes was undertaken, it was discovered that notwithstanding the fact that 358 persons were purported to have voted at the said polling division, only 357 votes were accounted for in the final count of the ballots. Consequently, a search for the missing ballot was done on the 28th day of November, 2003, by the Presiding Officer, Albert Fortune in the presence of the agents for the Petitioner and the First Respondent, and a police officer, but this ballot was not found. (ii)
Following the futile search for the said ballot, the Petitioner contacted
the Second Respondent and communicated to the said Respondent, his dissatisfaction
with the conduct of the poll and his refusal to concede defeat in the
poll. (iii)
The planned investigation and/or inquiry never did occur. Accordingly,
the final counting of the votes cast in the constituency of Carriacou
and Petit Martinique was never completed as required by law. (iv) Furthermore, the return, writs and other documentation prepared and transmitted by the First and Second Respondents acting jointly and/or severally in respect of the said poll were illegal, void and of no effect and ought not to have been acted upon. THE PETITIONER THEREFORE PRAYS: (1) That it may be ordered that there be a scrutiny of the votes recorded as having been cast in the election; (2) That it may be determined that the First Respondent was not duly elected and that the Petitioner was duly elected and ought to have been returned and that the election was void. (3) That the Court conduct an inspection of the rejected ballots so as to verify the accuracy of the rejections (4) Further or in the alternative, that, in the premises the election of the First Respondent is invalid and this Honourable Court ought to determine that the Petitioner was duly returned and elected. (5) That the Petitioner may have his costs of this Petition.
1
A Declaration that Elvin Nimrod, the First Respondent, was not duly
elected as the parliamentary representative for the constituency of
Carriacou & Petit Martinique, the purported election having been
void and of no effect. 3 A Declaration that the vote cast in polling division number 11 on behalf of Ms.Ceilia Bethel was (invalidly cast) was not a valid vote, having been inconsistent with the procedure laid down by the Representation of the Peoples Act, 1993 and is therefore void and of no effect. 4 A Declaration that the vote cast in polling division Number 10 in the name of John Lewis or Hanson Lewis was not a valid vote, having been cast by a person other than John Lewis or Hanson Lewis in breach of the procedure laid down in the Representation of People Act, 1993 and is therefore void and of no effect. 5 A Declaration that the votes cast in polling division Number 8 in the names of John R.Bedeau and Glen Fortune were not valid votes, having been cast by persons other than John R.Bedeau and Glen Fortune in contravention of the Representation of People Act, and are therefore void or of no effect. 6 An Order that the votes of the following six (6) persons mentioned above, namely, Cosnel Baptiste, Solomon Peters, Ceilia Bethel, John Lewis (or Hansen Lewis), John R.Bedeau and Glen Fortune be struck off the list of valid votes and be treated as rejected votes. 7 A Declaration that the following ten (10) persons, namely Clara Thomas (Polling Division 2), Michael Quashie and Sherri Samuel (Polling Division 3), Ann Louisa Rullow (Polling Division 6), Catherine Joseph, Augustine James, Catherine Clement, Risha Sylvester and John Bedeau (Polling Division 9), Evelyn Noel (Polling Division 10) are duly registered voters who ought to have been included in an Addendum List of Electors pursuant to Section 20 (2) of the Representation of People Act and therefore allowed to vote in their respective polling divisions on election day. Or in the alternative, 8 A Declaration that the following five (5) persons, namely, Veronica Roberts (Polling Division 1), Benedict Andrews (Polling Division 3), Faith Samuel and Ann Lawrence (Polling Division 5), and Louisa Matheson ought not to have been included in an Addendum List of Electors to allow them to vote on election day. 9 A scrutiny by this Honourable Court of the rejected ballot which bore the "X" below the name and symbol of the Petitioner in polling division 10. 10 A Declaration that the rejected ballot referred to in 9 above is a good and valid vote for the Petitioner and ought to have been counted in his favor. 11 A Declaration that the various errors, irregularities, and illegal and irregular practices on election day on the part of the Respondents, their servants and/or agents are sufficient to have affected the final results for the choice of parliamentary representative for Carriacou & Petit Martinique and could have adversely affected the chances of the Petitioner to be the duly elected representative. 12 An Order that a By-election be held for the Constituency of Carriacou and Petit Martinique.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
information is property of Grenada Today Ltd, and is reproduced here with
permission. |
|
Belcom
Technologies, 75-17 101 Avenue, Ozone Park, NY 11416 USA (718) 845-9768 |