CHIEF Justice Roxane George-Wiltshire’s decision not to rule on the validity of the vote cast by Charrandass Persaud last December is now being challenged by Berbice farmer Compton Reid.

Reid, through his attorneys Rex McKay, S.C; Neil Boston, S.C; Robert Corbin and Bettina Glasford, filed an appealed challenging the decision of the High Court on several grounds.
According to his attorneys, the chief justice misdirected herself and erred in law when she held that Declarations (3), (5), (6) and (7) could not be granted in any event as the no-confidence motion proceedings were saved by virtue of Article 165 (2).

Via those declarations, Reid sought to have the court rule that Persaud’s nomination as an A Partnership for National unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) candidate was invalid; that he was disqualified for election as a Member of the National Assembly; that the vote cast in favour of the no-confidence motion was null and void; and that the “unlawful yes vote” could not have resulted in passage of the no-confidence motion. But the chief justice, in handing down her decision, said she did not have jurisdiction to hear the matter, and in the event she did, the declarations could not have been granted.

“The learned chief justice failed to consider the question of “substantial severability,” since the vote cast on the no-confidence motion can be severed, so that the valid part could operate independently of the invalid part which would permit the court to sever the unlawful vote by Charrandass Persaud,” Reid’s attorneys explained. They contended that Chief Justice George-Wiltshire also erred when she ruled that she had no jurisdiction to grant the declarations sought, because the application should have been brought by way of a Fixed Date Application. They pointed out that according to Section Five of the National Assembly (Validity of Elections) Act, an election petition must be filed within 28 days; however, in the case of Persaud, it was only after his controversial vote that it was discovered that he had dual citizenship status.

“…the ruling of the learned chief justice refusing to grant the orders sought at paragraphs three, four, five, six and seven of the Fixed Date Application is inconsistent with her earlier ruling. She determined at paragraphs 82 and 110 that she had jurisdiction to grant and did grant the declarations sought by the Appellant/Applicant at paragraphs one and two of his Application for Constitutional Relief,” the attorneys argued.

In their application, they also pointed out that Justice George-Wiltshire further misdirected herself when she found that Persaud was not a member by failing to take into consideration the false declaration made by Persaud. It was further pointed out that Article 155 provides for disqualification for elections as members of the National Assembly.
“The learned chief justice misdirected herself and erred in law when she held that she did not have jurisdiction to grant any of the Orders sought by the Appellant/Applicant…by failing to consider that an issue is not truly collateral if it is the central issue which has to be decided,” the attorney said.

Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Basil Williams; Speaker of the National Assembly, Dr. Barton Scotland; Charrandass Persaud, Minister of Sate Joseh Harmon have been added as a party in the matter.