CCJ appeal intended to bring clarity to election of President, MPs – PPP/C

Court of Appeal on declaration of elections results

The Opposition People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) is contending that the Court of Appeal’s ruling in the Eslyn David case on Monday has thrown the law into a state of total confusion when it comes to the election of the President and members of the National Assembly.
The Court of Appeal on Monday found that it has exclusive jurisdiction to hear matters concerning the election of a President while the High Court, via an elections petition, is empowered to hear and determine matters in relation to the election of members to the National Assembly. However, the PPP/C is contending that this distinction has, in fact, created mass confusion as to how the election of the President and members of the National Assembly can be challenged.
The party noted that the Court of Appeal has wrongly ruled that the two issues must be challenged separately in different courts. In an effort to bring clarity to this newly invoked issue, the PPP/C has approached to Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).
The party explained that his move is necessary since the jurisdiction the Appeal Court conferred upon itself is wrong.
Additionally, the PPP/C said it also has to safeguard against orders to either direct Chief Elections Officer (CEO) Keith Lowenfield to submit a fraudulent and perverted report, or to protect a fraudulent and perverted report from being submitted by the CEO to the Commission. The PPP/C, in a statement, accused CEO Lowenfield of conspiring to disenfranchise some 275,000 Guyanese who voted on March 2. This number, the party stated, amounted to approximately 60 per cent of the persons who voted at those elections.
In essence, the party is saying that Lowenfield’s revised figure is aimed at giving A Partnership for National Unity/ Alliance For Change (APNU/AFC) a two-thirds majority in the National Assembly. They noted that the CEO intends to do so by merely acting upon the false, hearsay and untested allegations of APNU/AFC.
Additionally, the PPP/C said Lowenfield would be handing the incumbent a victory without even “conducting any investigation and upon affording no voter, or any other political party an opportunity to be heard, to test these allegations, or to lead any evidence of their own. Needless to say, the Chief Elections Officer has no power, or authority, to do any such thing. If any Chief Elections Officer is so empowered, then such a person, by himself, will determine a new Government at any elections, irrespective of the will of the electorate. This will not be democracy, but anarchy.”
Moreover, the party remains steadfast in its contention that the Appeal Court’s declaration that “more votes” means “more valid votes”, amounts to being a non-decision since any reference to votes in the Constitution and the Laws of Guyana can only mean valid votes. It added that it is inconceivable for anyone to believe that a Government or a President can be elected by invalid votes.
Meanwhile, the statement accused the coalition of employing various strategies to clinch to power illegally while identifying the Court of Appeal case as one of the latest acts of desperation. The PPP/C noted that the APNU/AFC disguised an election petition and contrived it wrongfully into a special jurisdiction created by the Constitution in which a challenge can be filed questioning the validity of the election of a President upon the declaration of the final results of elections. To that end, the party reiterated that the Appeal Court was misguided in its decision since the President has not yet been elected since the final declaration is still pending.