Failure to resolve election petitions after four years is bad for democracy – Jomo

It is unfortunate that with just a few months left before the end of the current government’s term, the Election Petitions are still yet to be resolved.

This is the view of Jomo Thomas, Speaker of the House, who shared his thoughts on the matter during We FM’s “Manifesto 2020” programme last Friday, February 21.

Trials for the Election Petitions, which were presided over by Trinidadian Judge Stanley John, began on February 11, 2019.

The petitioners, Benjamin “Ben” Exeter and Lauron “Shearer” Baptiste, who are candidates for the New Democratic Party (NDP) challenged the victory of Sir Louis Straker and Montgomery Daniel in the Central Leeward and North Windward seats respectively.

Following the trial, Justice John, on March 21 dismissed the election petitions, stating that the Court could find no evidence to support the major issues raised by the petitioners.

However, the New Democratic Party, on April 4 announced its intentions to appeal the decision, noting that as far as the Party was concerned, the matter was not settled as they did not accept or agree with the judgment.

“I think that it is a fundamental flaw in our democracy. I think that when you have these kind of protests, the Court should ensure that any conflict, any problems, any questions about the poll, about the election should be resolved in a year… of the last poll,” Thomas said.

He said that in his view, there was nothing which indicated that the 2015 elections were not free or fair.

Having been part of the process as the South Leeward candidate for the ULP, Thomas said that if anyone could have indicated that the ULP had rigged or cheated in the elections, he would have resigned from the party and the speakership.

But he has yet to see such evidence.

“There were certainly irregularities and irregularities in some cases that the observer missions have cited for some time and irregularities that any serious government — and I’m sure this government is a serious government — would make an attempt to correct. But I didn’t see anything which says that the numbers reflected on the night of the elections were not the will of the people, as reflected in the ballots, which they went to the polls to cast,” he said.

However, the Speaker said it was bad for democracy to not yet have a resolution four years and two months into the current government’s term, particularly in a case where the challenges to two constituencies could have resulted in a different government being formed.

The Court of Appeal is scheduled to be in St Vincent and the Grenadines for three days, beginning yesterday, February 24 to Wednesday February 26.

But the Petitions Appeal is not on the list of matters to be dealt with during that period.

“…I haven’t followed the process particularly closely to say what were the legal tactics of both sides, but if you’re a sitting government, and you have a five-year term, and you have contested elections in two constituencies, and you were able to go for four years on two months, without a resolution one way the other, I would say you’re doing pretty well,” Thomas said, referring to whether the matter would be resolved before the next General Elections.

Elections in St Vincent and the Grenadines according to the Constitution, must be held by March 2021. But many anticipate that it will be called in December this year, as has been the trend in previous times.

Thomas, a lawyer, noted that if a decision were to be reached now, then a bi-election in either or both constituencies may be held.

“That would be an interesting constitutional question because if four years and two months of this term is gone, and the opposition finally wins in court and hypothetically, suppose they were to go on to win one of two, in other words, the status quo has changed and they go to a bi-election and win one or two of those, the question is do they serve eight months or do they serve five years?,” he said.

The lawyer said that he hasn’t given it a lot of thought but “I’m sure somebody who knows much more than I know, would quickly have an answer to say, No, no, no, they may only have to serve the remainder of the term.

“But that’s clearly an argument that would be made by any set of lawyers who would want to argue that view…,” Thomas said.