BASSETERRE, St. Kitts –HIS Lordship Justice Francis Belle this morning (Dec. 3) handed down his ruling regarding a request for full disclosure of audiotapes of the meetings of the Constituency Boundaries Commission (CBC) in the ongoing judicial review case.
The tapes became a matter of debate when lawyers representing two opposition parliamentarians, Hon. Mark Brantley, Leader of the Opposition and parliamentary representative of the Concerned Citizen’s Movement (CCM), and Hon. Shawn Richards, lone parliamentarian for the People’s Action Movement (PAM), had cited a number of “inconsistencies” with the minutes of the CBC meetings.
After a lengthy in-chamber meeting with lawyers for both sides, Justice Belle read a number of important orders from his seven page ruling. The respondents were ordered to submit audiotapes of the CBC meetings that made mention of producing a report before the date December 16, 2009.
Belle refused to grant the claimants’ request for the audiotapes of all six meetings of the Commission, as he explained that he does not think that they would be “helpful” to the claimants at this time.
The presiding judge repeatedly admonished both sides to be forthcoming with the truth in these proceedings and at the same time urged all parties involved to exercise restraint in discussing the matter to the media and the public at large.
Senior Counsel Anthony Astaphan, representing the government in this matter, told the press that he was “pleased” with this morning’s ruling and indicated his party’s willingness to cooperate with the Court.
“We agreed by consent that we would allow the minutes in for November 11 and we asked for time to have it transcribed professionally so the judge can have it and he has rejected all the other minutes of the meetings requested, save and except discussions relating to whether there was a deadline of December 16, 2009,” he said.
Lead counsel for Brantley and Richards, Constance Mitcham, said at this point the ruling cannot be considered a rejection of the application for full disclosure as there is still “a long way to go” in the case.
“We will make applications as we go along as we see fit. I don’t think one could say that anything was refused. He has said that he expects candour from the respondents...and so I think that it is reasonable that he is giving them an opportunity to be truthful to the Court. So, we are taking everything step by step,” she added.
The date December 16 arose as Mitcham and her team cited great emphasis being placed on that date as a deadline for the CBC report to be produced.
She argued that the date is an “irrelevant consideration” to the work of the CBC, though it does mark the fifth anniversary of the current National Parliament’s first sitting, and thus its automatic dissolution as mandated by the Constitution.
Court is scheduled to resume this afternoon at 2:00 p.m.
