–as Acting Chief Magistrate to address issues regarding ‘fresh start’

THE long-delayed election fraud matters have resumed with a fresh set of “preliminary issues” to be resolved by Acting Chief Magistrate Faith Mc Gusty of the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts.
The trial is now being handled by Magistrate Mc Gusty, who has taken over from her predecessor Senior Magistrate Leron Daly, who had been on medical leave since September 2024.
The trial, which involves several high-profile defendants accused of conspiring to rig the results of the 2020 national elections, is set to resume with a fresh set of legal issues to resolve.

At a case-management conference (CMC) on Wednesday, Nigel Hughes, one of the defence attorneys raised an issue on the legal principle of de novo, or a fresh start. He argued that the case should proceed without being bound by previous decisions made by Magistrate Daly.
This includes a significant decision from her tenure, which had ruled that some of the other related charges should be heard indictably rather than summarily, as well as the defendants’ not guilty pleas in summary proceedings (the matters that are currently under consideration by the court).
For indictable matters, the court conducts a preliminary inquiry or committal proceeding to assess the merits of the charges. After hearing and evaluating the evidence presented, the magistrate may commit the accused to stand trial in the High Court if there is sufficient evidence. If the evidence is deemed insufficient, the accused will be discharged.

While the defence team advocated a fresh start, the prosecution, led by King’s Counsel Darshan Ramdhani, emphasised that the proceedings have already been set in motion and should continue in accordance with prior decisions made by the former magistrate.
Ramdhani further contended that Magistrate Daly’s previous ruling on the trial’s format should stand, especially since it was made after careful consideration of the facts and legal framework. Ramdhani explained that sometimes a decision is made by the Chief Magistrate to have a case tried summarily, which means it is handled in a quicker, more simplified manner.

He added that in such cases, a plea of not guilty is often tendered (submitted) before the case is transferred to another magistrate. Once the case is with the new magistrate, Ramdhani stated that there is usually no need to take a new plea, as the original plea remains valid.
He agreed with Hughes to some extent, acknowledging that for certain preliminary matters, the case may need to be restarted when it is handed over to a different magistrate, but otherwise, the case continues based on prior proceedings. Ramdhani suggested that this is a standard practice in the court system.

“I would urge this court that this has been the practice and should be recognised to be so,” the King’s Counsel submitted.
However, Hughes countered that while this may be a common practice driven by expediency, it should not override the law. He emphasised that the law should take precedence over established practices or procedural norms.
Hughes stated: “There is a practice driven purely by expediency. When people come to court…the [magistrate would ask them] Yuh want this matter tried in the High Court or in the Magistrates’ Courts? Invariably, the defendant, represented or unrepresented, would say get it done here [magistrates’ courts] for many reasons…the penalty is less and pure expedition.

“The issue here is not one of law. The issue here is one of law that we are raising as a matter of law and therefore I don’t believe practice will trump what the legal position is.”
Ramdhani highlighted that if convicted in the magistrates’ courts, the defendants could face a maximum sentence of three years in prison for each charge.
Magistrate Mc Gusty will hear oral arguments on the issue of a “fresh start” on December 9, 2024 at 10:00hrs, after which a date will be set for the commencement of the trial. In the meantime, the parties have until this month’s end to file their submissions.

Importantly, the acting chief magistrate, along with defence and prosecution lawyers, have urged the media and public officials to avoid misrepresenting the proceedings in court.
The magistrate disclosed that the judiciary has provided assistance to expedite the matter, specifically through providing her with a judicial research assistant.
“So, we may be able to move on as quickly as possible,” Mc Gusty noted.

The defendants in this case include former District Four (Demerara-Mahaica) Returning Officer Clairmont Mingo; former health minister under the A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance for Change (APNU+AFC) government Volda Lawrence; PNC/R activist Carol Smith-Joseph; former Chief Elections Officer (CEO) at the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Keith Lowenfield; former Deputy Chief Elections Officer Roxanne Myers; and GECOM employees Sheffern February, Enrique Livan, Denise Babb-Cummings, and Michelle Miller.
Collectively, they face 19 conspiracy charges related to alleged electoral fraud. All defendants have denied the charges and are currently out on bail. Apart from Hughes, the defence team comprises attorneys Ronald Daniels, Eusi Anderson, and Darren Wade.
The prosecuting team also includes attorney Latchmie Rahamat, and several state counsel from the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).

According to the state’s case, the accused allegedly conspired to defraud the electorate by submitting an inflated vote count for Region Four, Guyana’s largest voting district, in favour of the APNU+AFC coalition, thereby undermining Guyana’s democratic process.
The prosecution has built its case on a substantial volume of evidence, including flash drives containing Statements of Poll (SoPs) and Statements of Recount (SoRs), 72 witness statements, and numerous official documents. Among the witnesses are high-profile individuals such as Local Government Minister Sonia Parag; Head of the Diaspora Unit, Rosalinda Rasul; Forensic Investigator, Rawle Nedd, and former Region Four Police Commander, Edgar Thomas.

The reportedly altered elections results, announced by Lowenfield, indicated an APNU+AFC win with 171,825 votes against the People’s Progressive Party/Civic’s (PPP/C) 166,343.
However, a subsequent recount, overseen by a Caribbean Community (CARICOM) team and GECOM, reversed the outcome, revealing a PPP/C victory by over 15,000 votes.

The recount clearly demonstrated that the PPP/C won with 233,336 votes, while the coalition received 217,920. GECOM made the decision to dismiss Lowenfield, Myers, and Mingo in August 2021, after the allegations of fraud came to light. Many welcomed this decision. The police filed charges against the defendants in late 2020.