Judge grants stay for appeal against naming President
JUSTICE Claudette Singh yesterday granted a seven-day stay of execution so that President Janet Jagan can appeal against the Tuesday Court ruling that said she was properly named a respondent in the PNC elections petition. Chief Elections Officer Stanley Singh is the other appellant favoured by the decision yesterday which temporarily halted hearing in the case initiated by People's National Congress (PNC) supporter, Esther Perreira, of Sophia, Greater Georgetown. The judge had, on Tuesday, overruled preliminary objections by Senior Counsel Stanley Hardyal, for the respondents including the President, who argued that Article 182 of the Constitution forbids the Head of State being cited in the litigation and for leave to be granted before its filing. The issues must now be adjudicated upon by the Guyana Court of Appeal. Although she granted his request yesterday, Justice Singh noted that Hardyal did not submit any authority in support of his application. But other Senior Counsel Rex McKay, representing Perreira, cited precedents to back his contention that the other side should not succeed. However, the judge said she would exercise her wide discretion in the interest of justice and allow Hardyal and his colleagues to move to the appellate tribunal. President Jagan and Chief Elections Officer Singh are asking that the Perreira case be dismissed on the grounds that the failure toÿserve them a copy of the authority on which it was filed had prevented them from appealing against it. Among other flaws complained of in the judgement is one which says Justice Singh erred in holding that, under Section 4 (2) of the National Assembly (Validity of Elections) Act, Chapter 1:04, Mrs Jagan was properly cited as being the PPP/Civic List Representative at the controversial December 1997 general elections, although the provisions of Article 182 of the Constitution of Guyana provided otherwise. Perreira, in the substantive suit, claimed the 1997 electoral process was so flawed by many procedural errors and instances of fraud that the results derived cannot be credibly deemed to accurately represent the will of the electorate as defined by the Final Voters List. 
|