BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – COUNSEL for the Governor-General, Supervisor of Elections and the Attorney-General (AG), Arundranauth Gosai yesterday (Nov. 25) told the court that his clients were uncomfortable with Resident Judge Justice Francis Belle presiding over a matter brought against them, as he had previously recused himself in a related case.
“During the last set of hearings that dealt with the CBC... the judge made certain comments and we had asked him to recuse himself on that matter, which he did...and so my clients felt that they wanted the judge to recuse himself from these matters since they are closely related,” Gosai said.
He was at the time making his opening statement to Justice Belle in the application filed on Tuesday (Nov. 24) by Leader of the Opposition in the Federal Parliament and representative of the Concerned Citizens Movement (CCM) Hon. Mark Brantley and Parliamentary Representative for the People’s Action Movement (PAM) Hon. Shawn Richards.
The two Parliamentarians requested leave to review the work and composition of the Constituency Boundaries Commission (CBC) following last week’s resignation of two of its members. They also requested a Court Order to constrain any work of the Commission and to prohibit the use of any report emanating from the CBC.
Lead counsel representing Richards and Brantley, Constance Mitcham quickly objected to Gosai’s request, noting that her team had seen no reason in this matter that would call for the judge’s recusal “at this early stage in the proceedings”.
Gosai also made reference to a letter previously sent by the AG indicating to the Registrar that Justice Belle should not preside over any matter dealing with boundary changes and the functions of the CBC.
In response, Justice Belle questioned the reason he was asked to be recused, and explained to the lawyers that he had dealt with matters involving the AG and ministers of government after his (Aug. 7) recusal.
In sharp criticism to the AG’s request, Justice Belle said, “The reasons given in this letter are laughable.” The presiding judge also explained that he is the only resident judge and should he recused himself there would be no judge available to hear the matter, which had been sought after with much urgency. He therefore refused to be recused in the matter.
It has been widely speculated that the CBC, a body constitutionally mandated to review the number and delimitations of boundaries, produced a new report which is rumoured to be tabled in Parliament during today’s (Nov. 26) sitting. Mitcham made the case that both opposition Parliamentarians have expressed fear that the government intends to present a “horrid” report to “deprive them of their opportunity to have a valid and meaningful access” to the court.
In the latter part of the hearing, Justice Belle explained that if Gosai, on behalf of his clients, were able to make an undertaking to the court that there would be no discussion or tabling of any report regarding any boundary changes, then the matter would be heard at a later date. Unable to give such a commitment, Gosai asked for an adjournment for 8:30 this morning, less than two hours before Parliament is expected to meet.
A number of questions surfaced when Justice Belle began assessing the grounds of Brantley and Richards to determine whether leave for judicial review and an injunction could be warranted. Those questions were with regard to whether the CBC is properly constituted with no members nominated by the Leader of the Opposition and Brantley’s rights to nominate two new members to the commission.
Justice Belle noted that the Constitution gives no “clear direction” as to how to deal with vacancies and stressed that the matter is one that was carried in part before another court. He said the claimants previously had the opportunity to clarify the rules of the CBC, but they did not do so.
Belle indicated that he was “reluctant” to give an injunction based on the grounds he had before him and, therefore, requested of Mitcham to submit her team’s other affidavits and authorities for them to be reviewed before this morning’s hearing.
While lawyers representing Brantley and Richards as well as GG, AG and Supervisor of Elections were able to discuss the matter before Justice Belle, no appearance made on behalf of the CBC, Electoral Commission, Speaker of the National Assembly and the Prime Minister, all of whom are respondents in this matter.
Proceedings in the matter continued earlier today and Belle is expected to announce whether an injunction would be granted.
