Judge John condemns Gaymes’ bias at count

The bias of the returning officer Winston Gaymes, to the Unity Labour Party(ULP) candidate, noted by official observers to the election, is a very serious condemnation of the electoral process.

Justice Stanley John made this statement in the heart of his 63-page judgment, expounding his decision to dismiss the petitions filed by New Democratic Party(NDP) candidates Lauron Baptiste and Benjamin Exeter.

Partiality was the only issue which the judge noted that there was evidence to support, and in delivering the summary of his judgment last Thursday, he described the court as noting it with a level of disquiet.

The claims against Gaymes by witnesses for the petitioner Exeter, were indeed profuse.

Exeter himself as well as Maia Eustace and Shirlan ‘Zita’ Barnwell, witnesses in the petition involving Central Leeward, contended that Gaymes, also called the first respondent, conducted the counts in a partial and improper manner.

The Judge noted the report from the Organization of American States(OAS), which says under the rubric ‘Partiality of the Returning Officer’, “The bias of the Returning Officer towards the ULP candidate and agents was clear. During the period witnessed by the OAS Observers, the returning officer routinely ignored attempts by the NDP agents to gain his attention, responded to their concerns or objections in a dismissive or exasperated fashion, or complained that they were wasting his time. On the other hand, concerns voiced by the ULP agents were immediately addressed and in one particular instance converted by the Returning Officer into a new instruction for the counting process.”

John determined this to be a “very serious castigation” and “indictment” against the electoral process.

“If the populace is to have confidence in the electoral process, elections must be free and fair,” he stated.

The right to vote is enshrined in the constitution, and citizens, while exercising this right, “must not feel intimidated in any way,” the judge stated.

“Partiality towards any party by an official performing an important function in an election cannot be condoned. Free and fair elections conducted properly under the existing laws is a constitutional mandate in St Vincent and the Grenadines and nothing must be done to affect public confidence in the impartiality of an election. The Court trusts that this condemnation will not go unnoticed,” he concluded.

In the absence of evidence from Gaymes contradicting the allegations against him, the court accepted the evidence of the petitioners.

However, the final question for the judge to contemplate was whether the election would be thought to be substantially in compliance with the election rules.

John did not think that the ordinary and informed person would condemn the election in the two constituencies as a sham or travesty on the known facts.

“The Court cannot say that the evidence of partiality has affected the election to the extent that there was no real electing at all in those constituencies,” he ruled.