Skip to main content

DPP, Top Cop ask High Court for copies of SoPs to convict Lowenfield, Mingo

                                 DPP Shalimar Ali-Hack and Top Cop Nigel Hoppie

Court proceedings have been filed by the Commissioner of Police and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), to obtain certified copies of the Statements of Poll (SoPs) that were in the possession of electoral officials who now stand charged with misconduct in public office.

According to the Notice of Application seen by this publication, Police Commissioner Nigel Hoppie, and DPP Shalimar Ali-Hack are seeking orders compelling the Registrar of the High Court to disclose certified copies of the SoPs used by Chief Election Officer (CEO) Keith Lowenfield and Region Four Returning Officer Clairmont Mingo for the March 2, 2020 elections.

The applicants want the copies of the original SoPs lodged in the Registrar’s possession, to be certified by the Registrar and delivered to the Attorney General, Senior Counsel Anil Nandlall and to the Guyana Elections Commission, who are the first and second named respondents.

In the application, it was pointed out that Mingo and Lowenfield, as well as Deputy CEO Roxanne Myers, is charged with misconduct in public office that relates to the declaration of fraudulent votes for the March 2 General and Regional Elections.

Previously the prosecution was in the position of applying to Lowenfield himself for these documents since he was the custodian of the documents. The SoPs and the Statements of Recount (SoRs) that were generated during the 30-day National Recount are necessary in order to prove that the figures submitted by Mingo and Lowenfield did not reflect the true election results.

“By the common law and statute, namely section 50 of the Criminal Law (Procedure) Act, the Commissioner of Police and any member of the Police Force have the lawful right to collect and recover all documents and property which are relevant to the investigation and prosecution of any criminal offense,” the application states.

Meanwhile, the DPP’s affidavit asserted that the documents will prove the defendants’ guilt in criminal offenses and will confirm that the defendants deliberately ignored the correct votes and made false declarations “in furtherance of their conspiracy.”

Clairmont Mingo (L) and Chief Elections Officer Keith Lowenfield (R)

Lowenfield is currently facing three counts of forgery and three counts of misconduct in public office. He has been placed on $300,000 bail. Myers, meanwhile, has been slapped with two counts of misconduct in public office and has been placed on $300,000 bail in relation to both charges.

These two were charged along with GECOM officials including embattled Region Four Returning Officer Clairmont Mingo, who is on $600,000 bail for charges similar to what Myers is facing.

Additionally, People’s National Congress Reform Chairperson Volda Lawrence and APNU/AFC activist Carol Joseph are also before the courts on electoral fraud charges. There are also electoral fraud charges against GECOM clerks Denise Bob-Cummings and Michelle Miller and GECOM Elections Officer Shefern February and Information Technology Officer Enrique Livan. They, too, have been released on bail.

Lowenfield’s report claimed that the coalition garnered 171,825 votes while the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) gained 166,343 votes. How he arrived at those figures is still unknown.

The certified results from the recount exercise supervised by GECOM and a high-level team from the Caribbean Community (Caricom) pellucidly showed that the PPP/C won with 233,336 votes while the coalition garnered 217,920.

The recount exercise also proved that Mingo heavily inflated the figures in Region Four – Guyana’s largest voting District – in favor of the then caretaker A Partnership for National Unity/Alliance For Change (APNU/AFC) regime.

https://www.inewsguyana.com/dp...hOyTWxb4oOlqewP1Wx0k

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Slowly but surely, these men and women will be exposed and face the music. I would like to see the faces of Granger, Moses, and Ramjattan when the Sop's are out. Basil William said the coalition won and they have to Sop's to prove it, The PPP posted their SoP's for the public to see. PNC/AFC hide theirs.  Some GNI'ers who supported this nonsense should also see jail for being stupid.

Viper
@Viper posted:

Slowly but surely, these men and women will be exposed and face the music. I would like to see the faces of Granger, Moses, and Ramjattan when the Sop's are out. Basil William said the coalition won and they have to Sop's to prove it, The PPP posted their SoP's for the public to see. PNC/AFC hide theirs.  Some GNI'ers who supported this nonsense should also see jail for being stupid.

It has been explained to you a million times that it is not the SOPs that are in contention.  It is what was in or out of the ballot boxes as revealed by the recount.  The PPP engineered the stuffing of ballot boxes.  Important documents that should have been in some of the boxes weren`t and that made ballots in those boxes invalid.  That is how Lowenfield got his numbers. 

T
@Viper posted:

........ Some GNI'ers who supported this nonsense should also see jail for being stupid.

People does get trow in jail for being stupid? You better run back ah Guyana then.

cain
Last edited by cain
@Viper posted:

Slowly but surely, these men and women will be exposed and face the music. I would like to see the faces of Granger, Moses, and Ramjattan when the Sop's are out. Basil William said the coalition won and they have to Sop's to prove it, The PPP posted their SoP's for the public to see. PNC/AFC hide theirs.  Some GNI'ers who supported this nonsense should also see jail for being stupid.

Like you respond to the PPP snake charmer, Jagdeo? Show your deranged mouth some more! My mongoose is waiting for you!

FM
Last edited by Former Member

Regardless.

It will still make for very good theater to see how much Mingo and company mutilated the SOPs that were in their custody.

The question would then be, why did they see the need to mutilate those SOPs and if doing so constitute an act of treason.

FM

Back when the PNC was still insisting on squatting illegally in office last year the PPP asked Judge Holder to direct the GECOM secretariat to surrender the SOPs in Mingo's possession for discovery but Holder denied that motion because he may be part of the PNC rigging attempt cabal.

FM

Appeal Court to hear arguments in dismissal of APNU+AFC’S election petition on June 14

Come June 14, 2021, the Guyana Court of Appeal will commence hearing arguments in the appeal filed on behalf of the A Partnership for National United/Alliance For Change (APNU/AFC), challenging Chief Justice Roxane George’s dismissal of the party’s second election petition for non-compliance with effecting service on former President David Granger.

The proceedings will commence at 13:30h.

Known as election petition #99, its petitioners are Brennan Nurse and Monica Thomas, who are challenging the outcome of the March 2020 General and Regional Elections for which the PPP/C emerged winners. They are asking the High Court to declare Granger as President from the very elections they claim were conducted in violation of electoral laws and the Constitution of Guyana.

Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister Anil Nandlall, SC, has filed a Notice of Motion in which he is asking that the party’s appeal against the ruling of Justice George be dismissed.
Nandlall is contending that there is no statutory or constitutional jurisdiction conferred on the Appeal Court to hear an election petition dismissed for procedural impropriety or any other reason not stated in Article 163 (1) of the Constitution of Guyana.

On January 18, 2021, Justice George dismissed the election petition owing to non-compliance with effecting service as prescribed under Section 8 of the National Assembly (Validity of Elections) Act and Rule 9 of the National Assembly (Validity of Elections) Rules.

The Chief Justice found that the petition was not properly served on Granger – the second named respondent. The manner of service is prescribed in Rule 9 (1) of the National Assembly (Validity of Elections) Rules, which imposes on the petitioners the statutory obligation to effect service within five days after the presentation of the petition.

Petition #99 having been filed on September 15, 2020, should have been served on the former President five days thereafter, which would have been September 21, 2020, since the fifth day – September 20, 2020 – was a Sunday. However, in the affidavit of service of Nurse, it was stated that the petition, along with the relevant documents, was only served on Granger on September 25, 2020 – five days outside of the statutorily-prescribed period.
Following Justice George’s ruling, the petitioners filed a Notice of Appeal asking that the decision be set aside and/or reversed, with costs awarded to them.

Irregular

Given that the Court of Appeal has no jurisdiction to hear an election petition dismissed for non-compliance with effecting service, Solicitor General Nigel Hawke contended that should the Court permit the hearing of the matter, it would not only be unlawful but also irregular and unconstitutional.

In an affidavit in support of the motion for dismissal of the Notice of Appeal, Hawke deposed that appeals regarding an election petition are governed exclusively by Article 163 (3) of the Constitution of Guyana, which sets out the circumstances under which such appeals can be filed.

Among them, he outlined, is a decision granting or refusing leave to institute proceedings for the determination of any question referred to in Article 163 (1) of the Constitution.
According to the Solicitor General, the decision of the Chief Justice was not, and did not involve, a determination of a question referred to in the aforesaid Article. On this note, he submitted that the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal to hear an appeal from a decision of the High Court must be founded in the Constitution and statute.

Like Nandlall, Hawke is contending “that there is no statutory or constitutional jurisdiction to the Court of Appeal to hear an election petition dismissed for procedural impropriety or any other reason not stated in Article 163 (1) of the Constitution of Guyana.”

Overriding objective

Expressing dissatisfaction with the ruling of the Chief Justice, lawyers of the petitioners are contending that Justice George, in dismissing the party’s election petition, failed to consider its overriding objective.

Lawyers for Nurse and Thomas contended that Justice George erred in law and misdirected herself by failing to recognise that the purpose of Rule 9 of the National Assembly (Validity of Elections) Rules, requiring service of an affidavit, is to verify that service was achieved within the time prescribed by the statute and that an error in the affidavit does not affect the fact of service.

They further contended that Justice George erred in law and misdirected herself by following the decision in Eusi Kwayana et al v The Chief Elections Officer et al, which decision in itself was erroneous. According to the lawyers, Justice George again erred in law and misdirected herself when she applied the doctrine of strict compliance by holding that such compliance related to the contents of the affidavit of service, instead of the filing of the affidavit of service on time.

Further, the lawyers argued that the Chief Justice also erred in law and misdirected herself when she concluded that leave was required to file a supplementary affidavit of service to give a more complete understanding of how service was effected on the former President.

Additionally, it is also being argued that the Chief Justice erred in dismissing the entire election petition for non-service, even though Granger notified the court that he would not oppose the election petition and that the other proper and necessary respondents were served within the statutory timeline.

FM
@Former Member posted:

Regardless.

It will still make for very good theater to see how much Mingo and company mutilated the SOPs that were in their custody.

The question would then be, why did they see the need to mutilate those SOPs and if doing so constitute an act of treason.

You're full of it!

T
@Former Member posted:

Back when the PNC was still insisting on squatting illegally in office last year the PPP asked Judge Holder to direct the GECOM secretariat to surrender the SOPs in Mingo's possession for discovery but Holder denied that motion because he may be part of the PNC rigging attempt cabal.

In a similar manner one may claim that you may be a beneficiary of PPP stolen money. 

T

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×