BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – THE legal drama surrounding the new electoral boundaries has intensified, as the People’s Action Movement (PAM) has now begun contempt of court proceedings against Attorney-General (AG) Hon. Dr. Dennis Merchant.
PAM Political Leader Lindsey Grant stated that the action was taken shortly after 1 p.m. yesterday afternoon (July 10).
“Contempt of court proceedings have begun against the Hon. Merchant, so he will have to go to court and say why he ought not to be imprisoned,” Grant told SKNVibes. “My party has begun these proceedings because the AG is the government’s representative and can be sued on its behalf.
“[Merchant] is in a position to advise the Prime Minister [Hon. Dr. Denzil Douglas] and government institutions as to their requirements under the law. He knew an injunction had been levied against the Constituency Boundaries Commission and himself as the government’s representative, and yet he still allowed the PM to table the document in Parliament.”
The opposition party has waged a legal war against the proposed boundary changes, which have been instituted with general elections constitutionally due in less than a year.
On July 2, PAM was successful in obtaining an injunction to prevent the report of the Electoral Boundaries Commission from being laid in Parliament. The order was upheld despite government challenge and the matter was adjourned until Monday (July 13).
The pending court action did not deter Prime Minister Douglas from tabling a draft proclamation on the report in an emergency session of the National Assembly on Wednesday (July 8). The resolution was subsequently approved on Thursday (July 9) and, according to Douglas, the Governor-General, His Excellency Sir Cuthbert Sebastian, signed a proclamation on the report later that day.
That same evening, PAM was granted two further injunctions; one to prevent the GG from signing the resolution into law and the other to restrain the Supervisor of Elections and the Electoral Commission from supervising elections with the new boundaries until the matter is resolved in the High Court.
Merchant acknowledged receipt of the new injunctions at a press conference yesterday morning and noted his chambers had received the order at around 11:30 a.m. However, the AG said his initial observations had produced some doubts as to the validity of the document.
“I realised [the order] has no number or stamp seal from the court. It is just an order purported to be signed by the High Court judge ...which is very unusual. Additionally, there is no affidavit to support the order. The order states that the applicants must undertake by their counsel to file and serve their application affidavit by 3:30 p.m. of July 10, 2009, so they have until this afternoon to do so,” he reasoned.
In reply, Grant scoffed at the reservations expressed by Merchant and said he was “appalled” by his attempts “to mislead the people of the country”.
“I am really appalled by the AG’s statement, especially since he is the highest officer of the court. He could tell you that in terms of that particular injunction, it being made after the court was closed, any order by the judge after that time would have to be made without the court being able to seal the document with the stamp.”
He added, “The absence of the stamp is because the injunctions were gathered in an emergency situation. The rules of the court allow for that; it does not nullify the documents. They would remain valid because the order would state it has given notice to undertake these processes. The documents the AG will receive later today will have the stamps.”
