The Caribbean Guyana Institute of Democracy (CGID) is accusing the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) of undermining the Guyana Court of Appeal and denying Guyanese the right to challenge the 2020 Elections results. Further, according to CGID, the ruling denies 50 percent of the electorate of Guyana its day in court, noting that “this will have significant social and political consequences in an already increasingly unstable Guyana.”
Yesterday the CCJ by a three (3) to two (2) decision ruled the Appeal Court has no jurisdiction to hear Election Petition No. 99 which was dismissed by the High Court . The minority ruled the matter could be heard at the Full Court. The High Court dismissed the petition on the grounds of late service, non-service, or improper service – on former President David Granger.
CGID contends the CCJ’s decision shows the Court “continued rewrite [of] the laws of Guyana with a series of decisions that deny justice to half of the Guyanese population, while siding with the [People’s Progressiev Party] PPP to exclude the Court of Appeal from hearing elections matters.”
Last December the Court of Appeal by majority decision ruled it had jurisdiction to hear an appeal of the High Court’s decision. The Court of Appeal’s decision was appealed to the CCJ by Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo and the Government.
CGID, in making reference to the High Court’s decision, states “[t]he person who served Mr. Granger with the document mistakenly affixed the incorrect date on the affidavit certifying that he was served. The incorrect date fell outside of the period mandated in the law for respondents to be served. Although the date was corrected, the Chief Justice held that the original incorrect date was the actual date of service.”
The institute reminds that Petition 99 contained significant evidence of voter fraud in the March 2020 General and Regional Elections, and accuses the PPP of desperately trying not to have the case heard, which the courts have obliged.
The National Recount unearthed grave irregularities and violations of the Representation of the People Act, which was acknowledged by the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) and the PPP. However, all argued GECOM has no power to make determinations on these only the court through election petition. The High Court and CCJ have since dismissed the case not on its merits but a procedural matter and previous approach to the wrong court respectively.
CGID notes “the declaration by GECOM that the PPP won the 2020 elections was based on fraudulent, invalid ballots. A CCJ decision directed GECOM to count all ballots, including alleged invalid ballots. That decision gave the PPP the victory.”
The institute says it is gravely concerned the CCJ ‘s decision has significantly eroded the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal on elections disputes and usurped the legislative powers of Parliament to change the Guyana Constitution and regime of elections laws.
“CCJ’s decisions have supplanted the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal at the behest of the PPP which has attacked the majority African Guyanese justices. Recently the Attorney General said the government intended to pass legislation to increase the number of Justices on the Court of Appeal. Clearly, the intent is to pack the court with PPP supporters to dominate the Judiciary.”
Expressing concern Guyana may be “dangerously heading towards dictatorship,” the institute accuses the CCJ of facilitating this by “brazenly grabbing jurisdiction which the Guyana Constitution does not intend for it to have, and arrogating to itself powers of a preeminent, premier policy or legislative body in the region.” It is therefore no wonder that other countries have refused to join the CCJ, the institute states.
“The Attorney General’s release of an embargoed opinion serves to highlight the PPP’s comfort with the CCJ. We fully expect the feigned outrage of the various CCJ judges will fall on deaf ears!”
On the day prior to the CCJ’s ruling there was a blast post on the personal Facebook of Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs Anil Nandlall, SC, celebrating the ruling. The public release was made in spite of CCJ’s directive to the contrary in a draft copy of the ruling emailed to the lawyers in the case.
Solicitor General, Nigel Hawke, told the CCJ the information was placed on the AG’s Facebook by his administrator, not him. Observers queried the authenticity of Hawke’s statement given that the CCJ sent the information to the lawyers and it could not have appeared on AG’s Facebook without some level of his involvement. The Court was promised a public apology by the AG. However, CCJ Justice Maureen Ragnauth-Lee expressed concern that the confidentiality breach could impact the Court’s integrity
According to CGID, “it is time that Guyana removes any and all jurisdiction on election matters from the CCJ. Foreign judges should not have the ability to hand pick governments in Guyana.”
