CCJ rulings to determine elections, fate of GECOM Chairman set for today

Judgement Day

Today, from 10:00h, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) will deliver its judgement in a series of landmark cases that will determine not only whether the letter of Guyana’s Constitution will be upheld, but will also set precedents for Guyana and the Caribbean as a whole to follow.

Last week, the CCJ set June 18 as the date for ruling on the three no-confidence motion-related cases before it, as well as the challenge to the unilateral appointment of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Chairman.
The three No-Confidence Motion cases deal with Christopher Ram v The Attorney General of Guyana, the Leader of the Opposition and Joseph Harmon; Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo v the Attorney General of Guyana, Dr Barton Scotland and Joseph Harmon; and Charrandas Persaud v Compton Herbert Reid, Dr Barton Scotland, Bharrat Jagdeo and Joseph Harmon; the last of which deals with Persaud’s eligibility to vote in the House.
Persaud is a former Alliance For Change (AFC) Member of Parliament, whose conscience vote in favour of the Opposition’s no-confidence motion against the Coalition Government on December 21, 2018 effectively toppled the Government.
Article 106 (6) of the Constitution states: “The Cabinet including the President shall resign if the Government is defeated by the vote of a majority of all the elected members of the National Assembly on a vote of confidence.”
Meanwhile, Article 106 (7) states that, “Notwithstanding its defeat, the Government shall remain in office and shall hold an election within three months, or such longer period as the National Assembly shall by resolution supported by not less than two-thirds of the votes of all the elected members of the National Assembly determine, and shall resign after the President takes the oath of office following the election.”

Seeking a reversal
For a short time, Government had seemed to have accepted the ruling and the constitutional requirements. Meetings had even begun to be held at GECOM with a view to that body preparing for early elections. But ever since Persaud, who is a Canadian citizen, fled to his second home in the wake of threats against his life, the coalition Government has refused to go quietly into the night. Rather, the Government has utilised every avenue available to it in a bid to reverse its loss in the NCM.
The first such attempt was done the next time parliament met after the motion was passed – January 3 – when Government parliamentarians (the opposition boycotted the sitting) sought to have Speaker of the National Assembly, Dr. Barton Scotland, reverse the ruling on the grounds that 34, and not 33, was the majority needed out of 65 to pass the motion.
However, Scotland had refused, noting that while he has the authority to review and/or reverse previous rulings, he must always act in conformity with the Constitution of Guyana. It was a decision that was hailed by many as a demonstration of separation of powers at work.
The coalition Government’s next approach was to the High Court. There, they not only argued that 34 was the majority of 65, but they also argued that Persaud, as a dual citizen, should not have been in the National Assembly in the first place. However, acting Chief Justice Roxane George in January upheld the passage of the motion, ruling that it was validly passed with the 33 majority.
The fallout from her ruling on the dual citizenship issue, however, saw four other dual citizen MPs — former Ministers Joseph Harmon, Carl Greenidge, Dominic Gaskin and Dr. Rupert Roopnaraine — resigning from Parliament and Government, only for them to then be rehired by the Government in different capacities. To this day, Government has not come clean on the remuneration packages for these newly created positions.
Meantime, the Guyana Police Force initiated an investigation into Charrandas Persaud, claiming to have received information that the former MP was bribed for his vote, and had sought to purchase gold in bulk.
That investigation saw Persaud being vilified by Government Ministers and coalition supporters, until Public Security Minister Khemraj Ramjattan admitted a few days ago that there was not enough evidence that a crime had been committed to extradite Persaud from Canada.

Court of Appeal
The Government had better luck at the Court of Appeal, however, where they appealed the High Court ruling. The Court of Appeal’s decision on March 22 via a 2-1 majority, that an absolute majority of 34 votes out of 65 was needed to successfully pass the motion, threw the Government the lifeline it needed to continue in office.
The ruling came one day after the timeline mandated by the Constitution to call elections had elapsed. It also came in the wake of day one of mass protests from the parliamentary Opposition and its supporters.
The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), the final option for Guyana to adjudicate these matters, was then approached. During several days of rulings, the CCJ heard arguments from both sides. Their rulings are expected to deal with several questions raised.
One of the most important ones is whether the NCM was validly passed with 33 votes out of 65. While the Constitution makes no distinction between whether a simple or absolute majority was needed, the Government has argued that the Opposition needed an absolute majority.
In addition, another crucial decision the CCJ will have to make is whether Persaud’s status as a dual citizen would have invalidated a previous vote he had taken, something the Opposition has argued it would not have done.
Another ruling would deal with whether Persaud, by not informing the Speaker beforehand that he planned to vote according to his conscience, did in fact go against his party list.
Compelling arguments were made to the effect that MPs are not robots, and forcing them to vote according to the party agenda defeats the spirit and intent of no- confidence motions.

Unilateral appointment
Meanwhile, the unilateral appointment case the CCJ heard on May 8 was brought by the People’s Progressive Party’s (PPP) Executive Secretary, Zulfikar Mustapha, challenging the appointment of current Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Chairman, retired Justice James Patterson.
Patterson was appointed to the position of Chairman of GECOM in 2017, after President Granger had rejected three lists comprising 18 names submitted by Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo for the post of GECOM Chairman.
Last week, the CCJ rejected a last minute application by Attorney General Basil Williams to adduce new evidence in the No-Confidence Motion (NCM) cases, on the grounds that the new evidence adds nothing of value and has little relevance.
The “new evidence” has to do with comments made by Charrandas Persaud during a recent Globespan live show, which Government is alleging purports to show he knew that as a dual citizen he ought not to have been in the parliamentary chambers.
Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo has already announced that his party and its supporters would return to the streets should the CCJ validate the vote and invalidate the coalition Government’s legitimacy, in order to pressure the Government to hold the General and Regional Elections it should have held in the first place since March 21, 2019.

On the other hand, Attorney General Williams had intimated, during proceedings before the CCJ bench in Trinidad last month, that a ruling against the Government could result in unrest; a statement that was subsequently condemned by the Georgetown Chamber of Commerce and Industry (GCCI).
All this while, confusion has reigned over GECOM’s ability to carry out elections. The entity has been accused of deliberately dragging its feet to delay elections, and lawyers have argued that the CCJ should issue an order compelling the commission to hold elections as soon as possible.
Much, therefore, is at stake for Guyana, and the eyes of the nation will be on the Trinidad-based CCJ.