Coalition supporter moves to High Court seeking to block declaration of recount results

Despite multiple court rulings, including by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), that matters regarding elections can only be attempted through an elections petition and that the business of GECOM cannot be inquired into by a court, a supporter of the Coalition has moved to the High Court seeking to block a declaration of the results of the national vote recount.

The filing of the case, for which no judge has been assigned, comes conveniently before the 2 p.m. deadline by which the Chief Elections Officer Keith Lowenfield, is slated to comply with a directive he has been given to produce a report based on the results of the national vote recount.

Justice (rt’d) Claudette Singh, Chair of GECOM had on Monday set aside all declarations made before the national vote recount started. It means the only valid figures on the record are those from the recount.

Accordingly, GECOM Chairman instructed Lowenfield for the third time to submit a report which will be used to declare the results.

However, someone named Misenga Jones, in an application filed by attorney Mayo Robertson has moved to the court seeking a declaration that the Chairman and the Commission have not complied with the constitutionally stated process as outlined in Article 177(2)(b) of the Constitution.

That part of the Constitution says the party with more votes wins the elections and that the chair of the GECOM will declare the results based on the advice of the Chief Elections Officer.

The applicant said the Chair has failed to declare the results of the elections in accordance with the advice given by Lowenfield. In the two reports he submitted so far, Lowenfield acted unlawfully, the CCJ found, by dumping 115,000 votes.

The CCJ also said the only results that are valid at this time are those from the recount. But in his second report, Lowenfield did not use those recount figures and instead used figures which included the exact figures from a March 13 declaration in District Four that was largely dismissed as being fraudulent.

Jones is contending that GECOM has no authority to declare any person as President except in accordance with the advice of the Chief Election Officer tended in his report pursuant to Section 96(1) of the Representation Act.