Sunday decision on UNC candidate

This after the Independent Liberal Party (ILP) yesterday filed an application for leave for judicial review of the legitimacy of the UNC’s Adrian Shazar Ali candidacy on the grounds of his address.

Putting on her legal robes, Opposition Leader and UNC political leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar yesterday in the third San Fernando High Court pleaded with Justice Rahim for a prompt decision, arguing that the absence of a decision could be used as a jabbing point for opposing political parties in the last two days of the election campaign.

“These are political considerations,” said Justice Rahim, “my remit does not have those considerations.” The judge said Persad- Bissessar’s argument was based on the assumption that he would rule in her favour and stood his ground to decide tomorrow morning. The application for leave for judicial review was made by ILP Deputy Political Leader Sunil Ramjitsingh acting as the “election agent” of Simeon Mahabir, the ILP candidate for Munroe Road/Caroni Savannah. The review application contends that Ali resides outside of said electoral district.

ILP political leader and attorney Rekha Ramjit told the court that since the law allowed for Ramjitsingh to be sued on Mahabir’s behalf as his election agent, he (Ramjitsingh) could also sue on Mahabir’s behalf, thereby having locus standi (legal right to bring court action). However, another of Ali’s lawyers - Deborah Peake SC, countered that Ramjit offered no evidence that Ramjitsingh was indeed Mahabir’s election agent.

Ramjit said that Section 11 of the Municipal Corporations Act spells out that councillors must reside within the electoral district they are representing.

Justice Rahim interjected, asking, “isn’t it saying the exact opposite?” Rahim said he interprets the law to mean that councillors could represent as long as they live within ten miles outside the boundaries of the municipality.

Ramjit said Ali lives at 69 Mon Plasir Road, Caroni and produced a company’s registration form on which Ali is listed as a Director, as evidence.

This address, Ramjit argued, was contrary to the 41 Clarke Road, Charlieville address declared in Ali’s application to be nominated for the local government election.

Peake countered that the definition of “residing” could mean that a person could possess multiple properties and therefore an address on a company’s registry is insufficient to prove residency.

Added to this, the law places no “duty” on a returning officer to investigate whether the address placed on an application was true. Ramjit also did not provide sufficient evidence that 69 Mon Plasir Road, Caroni fell outside ten miles of the Chaguanas Borough Corporation.

Persad-Bissessar said the Representation of the People Act provided a seven day window prior to nomination day for the legitimacy of candidates to be “scrutinized” by appointed and approved “scrutineers” and a further one hour window after for said nomination to be contested.

Both windows were missed, she said.

Justice Rahim considered this argument and asked, “If it is discovered on the day before an election that the candidate perpetrated fraud against the returning officer, what recourse is there?” To answer this question and to allow time to read and digest all the information, Rahim denied the strong appeals by both Persad- Bissessar and Peake for an immediate decision. He will give a decision and his reasoning orally tomorrow morning in the Port-of-Spain Hall of Justice