…Hughes writes DPP again to revoke Datadin’s appointment to prosecute Lawrence, Mingo, Joseph
Attorney-at-Law, Nigel Hughes has written again to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DDP) outlining six core reasons why People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) Member of Parliament (MP) and Attorney-at-Law, Sanjeev Datadin cannot fairly prosecute the electoral fraud cases before the Court.
The Village Voice received confirmation of this from a trusted source which indicated that Hughes wrote this time on behalf of Chairman of the People’s National Congress/Reform (PNC/R), Volda Lawrence; Region Four Returning Officer (RO), Clairmont Mingo and APNU+AFC Region Five Representative, Carol Joseph.
The Attorney last wrote the DPP, Shalimar Ali-Hack, about a week ago, requesting that she revoke the appointment of Datadin as special prosecutor in the cases brought against the Chief Elections Officer (CEO), Keith Lowenfield and Deputy CEO, Roxanne Myers by the police.
In Lowenfield and Myers’ cases, the DPP has granted fiat to attorneys Glenn Hanoman, Ganesh Hira, George Thomas, Mark Conway, Perry Gosai and Datadin — who is to head the team. On Friday, October 28, 2020, lawyers representing Lawrence, Mingo and Joseph were made aware that, additionally, the Magistrate issued a fiat to Datadin to present and prosecute the cases against the three.
The source informed the Village Voice that Hughes pointed the DPP to Rule VII 13 of the Code of Conduct located in the Fourth Schedule of the Legal Practitioners (Amendment Act) 2010 which states that the prosecutors must place his facts before the Court “dispassionately” and see that justice is done through “fair trial upon its merits”.
Hughes and others do not believe that this can come from Datadin who has openly expressed his bias — aligned with his Party’s position – against Lowenfield, Mingo, Lawrence, Myers and Joseph. The six reasons outlined to the DPP in the most recent letter were:
Datadin is a Member of the PPP/C and serves as one of its MP in the National Assembly.
Datadin has over 20 years of legal experience in Guyana and the Caribbean and has provided services for the PPP/C in several past election cases. He also represented recalled MP, Charrandass Persaud – who voted in favor of the no confidence motion against the APNU+AFC — at the level of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). Datadin was also one of the nominees of Vice President [then Opposition Leader] Bharrat Jagdeo to serve as Chair of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM).
Datadin and the PPP/C have made open statements about the clients involved.
“What happens if a Polling Clerk made an error and did not cross off all the names who voted or was having lunch and missed a name? How is this to be resolved? Do we trust Mingo and his gringos to resolve it? Do we expect [CEO, Keith] Lowenfield and [DCEO, Roxanne] Myers to get an attack of morality and resolve it fairly?” Datadin has stated in recent times
The main political opponent of the PPP/C is the PNC/R.
It is common knowledge that the PPP/C’s main competitor is the PNC/R, the largest party apart of the APNU+AFC Coalition. The two political groups went head-to-head in the now internationally famous 2020 General and Regional Elections.
Both major political parties have accused the other of wrongdoing during the General and Regional Elections
The political power struggle between the two is yet to subside with an Election Petitions hearing to come up in November 2020 which will determine whether the current Government was legitimately elected. At his first presentation in the National Assembly in September 2020, during the Budget Debates, Datadin expressed his position that the world watched the “breakdown of the rule of law in Guyana” and the threat to its democracy at the hands of the former APNU+AFC government.
Protests have come from persons on both sides since the holding of the General and Regional Elections in March 2020.
Throughout the five-month long elections representatives of the PPP/C and APNU+AFC have protested verbally and physically calling for the Elections Commission or Court to act based on their position on what is just. Protests have taken place outside the Office of the President; in front of the Court; outside the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and on several other instances. Hughes has maintained that it must be taken into consideration that the allegations against his clients is highly pollical in content and consequence.
The political mood of the country can be considered as tense.
The country’s Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC) and both sides of the political divide have noted their observation of a tense political climate in Guyana stemming from the elections. The nation now awaits the outcome of the Elections Petitions to be certain on the country’s political and governmental standing.
In his letter to the DPP, Hughes said that lawyers representing the clients maintain the position that Datadin has been placed in a position of conflict due to his expressed political views and association. Reference was also made to the Full Court decision in the matters of the Applications of Maurice Smith and Roderic Peterkin against the DPP in 2020 in which the Full Court determined that the decisions of the DPP were not insulated from challenge in the Court.
The source said that Hughes once again notified the DPP that a judicial review of her appointment of Datadin will be sought if she does not revoke his appointment to the case.
