A HIGH COURT judge will rule on the UNC’s election petition challenging the results of the local government election for the district of Lengua/Indian Walk in the new year.
On Friday, Justice Marissa Robertson said she would deliver her ruling on the petition on January 8, 2024, but would try to do so by the end of the year.
She gave the date after hearing submissions from attorneys for the UNC and the Election and Boundaries Commission (EBC) at a trial at the Waterfront Judicial Centre, Port of Spain.
The UNC filed the petition on August 21 on the basis of what took place after two recounts which led to the People’s National Movement (PNM) candidate Autly Granthume being announced the winner, over the UNC’s Nicole Gopaul-Jones.
Granthume initially received 1,430 votes compared to Gopaul-Jones’s 1,425. At the end of the first recount, each candidate received 1,428 votes.
However, the returning officer rejected a special ballot in favour of Gopaul-Jones, which would have broken the tie, because the presiding officer had not initialled it.
The candidate’s election agent and counting agent objected, but this was overruled and a second recount was done, resulting in the same outcome.
The EBC maintained its reasoning for rejecting the ballot as required by election rules under the Representation of the People Act. In subsequent correspondence, the EBC claimed Gopaul-Jones’s representative only objected after they realised the recount had ended in a stalemate.
In submissions, Gopaul-Jones’s attorney, Anand Ramlogan, SC, said there was no dispute that there were no initials on the ballot nor was there an allegation it was fake or suspect.
However, he maintained, "They (the EBC) cannot disenfranchise the voter.” He said the fault in the ballot's not being initialled was because of the election officials and the law recognised that such “human errors" could occur, so the ballot could have been signed on election night before the votes were counted.
"It would be absurd and perverse if they (special voters) do not have the same rights as normal voters," Ramlogan said as he urged the judge to uphold the voter’s right to vote.
"The act is there to facilitate the right to vote, not marginalise it."
In response, the EBC’s lead attorney, Deborah Peake, SC, said the election rules were clear and unambigious on the special voting process.
“There are steps in place to ensure the integrity of the process.”
Special voting was held a week before the August 14 local polls.
“Their evidence supports what we say. It was not a proper ballot,” Peake said, adding that there was no disenfranchising of the voter. She also said that the EBC cannot alter election rules even if it is in the interest of democracy.
“It was not a valid ballot.”
She also said the returning officer acted properly and lawfully in rejecting the ballot because of the absence of the signature.
"That is the law. If you don't like the law, change it.
"You cannot arrogate on yourself the power to supplement the rules."
"They have no di
