BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – AFTER a month of debate, the substantive matter in the constituency boundaries case has come into focus at the Basseterre High Court today (Aug. 17) as all parties involved anticipated a speedy trial.
The arrival of the third judge, His Lordship Justice Errol Thomas, last Thursday (Aug. 13) signalled that the case would pick up pace from today. During their opening statements, both sides argued their grounds regarding the constitutionality of changes to the constituency boundaries.
In a 90-minute presentation, legal counsel for the People’s Action Movement (PAM) Mia Mottley called for judicial review of the Constituency Boundaries Commission (CBC) for the Court to rule as to whether the proposed boundary changes were fair. Mottley referenced statements allegedly made by Prime Minister Dr. the Hon. Denzil Douglas in May 2006 and by Deputy Prime Minister Hon. Sam Condor following the 2004 General Elections. The comments seemed to have reflected some of the boundary changes and the effects they may have in order to secure an “all-eight victory”.
Statistics of population distribution compared to the boundary changes were presented to the Court and Mottley argued that the changes would “substantively affect the party [PAM], its leader and its deputy”, especially on what she calls the “eve of a general elections”.
“To whom much is given, much is expected...The government seems to want to benefit from its own wrong doing. If ever the rule of law is on trial, this is the case!” she concluded.
Senior Counsel representing the Attorney-General in the matter, Anthony Astaphan scoffed at the arguments submitted by Mottley claiming that her presentation was a mixture of a few principles of law and a lot of politics.
Astaphan argued that the claimants (PAM) must make it clear that their representatives boycotted the Electoral Reform process. He noted that the party’s “continuation of unwillingness to work” with the CBC is a “statement of political strategy”.
The Senior Counsel argued that there is nothing that mandates the CBC to accept any technical advice or recommendations from the appointed Boundaries Technical Committee, stressing that the final decision is to be made in Parliament.
The ensuing arguments focussed on the role of the appointed Boundaries Technical Committee and the function of the CBC as it relates to the proposed boundary changes. This afternoon’s session is expected to see evidence from both sides as the case progresses toward a timely resolution.
