Acting High Court judge Justice Stanley. (iWN file photo)

Acting High Court judge, Justice Stanley John will hand down his ruling in the election petition cases on March 21.

The main opposition New Democratic Party (NDP), which has filed the petitions, made the disclosure in a press statement on Thursday, citing the judge.

“As we have done over the three years of this matter, all of us in the NDP await the decision of the judge with vigilance and undaunted determination. While we have worked diligently and continue to hope for a favourable outcome, the decision is entirely in the hands of the Judge who presided over the trial,” the party said.

“We are, however, cognisant that whichever side prevails, this matter will be finally determined by the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal.” 

Lawyer for the petitioners and the respondents will make oral submissions to the judge on March 6, at the specially constituted courtroom at the NIS Conference Room in Kingstown.

“There, they will explain clearly why the evidence and law support a decision in favour of Ben Exeter and Lauron Baptiste,” the NDP said.

“The entire nation should take note of these proceedings and as many as can make it to the courtroom on March 6th, must do so and witness our democracy on trial.”

The hearing of oral evidence in the long-delayed case ended on Tuesday, after seven days.

Exeter, who was the NDP’s candidate in Central Leeward in the Dec. 9, 2015 election is challenging the announced victory of the Unity Labour Party’s Sir Louis Straker in that district.

Lauron “Sharer” Baptiste, who was the NDP’s candidate in North Windward, is challenging the announced victory of Montgomery Daniel in North Windward.

4 replies on “PETITIONS TRIAL: Petitions judgement on March 21”

  1. A ruling by March 21? I’ll believe it when I hear it.

    The NDP is now on record as saying they would most certainly appeal a verdict the party did not like regardless of how wll reasoned it was.

    What does that say about their respect for the Caribbean legal system?

    1. Teacher of Higher Education says:

      What does that say about their respect for the Caribbean legal system? What are you saying?…It would only show how much respect they have for the judges decision if the obvious verdict is not reached. In my opinion the judge has shown bias when it comes to questions that were allowed to be asked by the petitioners. Whenever a question were asked that would blow the case “wide open”, it was not allowed. Nevertheless, it has easily been demonstrated that the election was certainly not conducted in accordance with how a democratic state should have done. The judge will have to admit that in his decision. Let me look into my crystal ball and tell you what the judge will say:….
      “Although the election was not conducted properly, a properly conducted election would still not have changed the outcome.”
      Of course this is not a proper response for a legal professional to make. This is a response you would expect to hear from someone who cheated on an election. It is possible to make all kinds of inconsistencies in an election whereby any single one will not change the outcome but taken in multiple they certainly could.
      A legal professional is supposed to know that laws are made for a particular purpose and thier is a reason they should be followed. If a Justice allows so many rules to be broken without recourse he/she sets a precedent for future elections and all of these “mistakes done on purpose” will always be allowed.

      Now, if the results of the election in these constituencies are not nullified, tell me about who has respect for the Caribbean Legal System or the SVG people’s vote, or any legal system or vote for that matter!

      After what we have seen in this trial, there is only one verdict to be reached. If it is not, I too would appeal.

  2. Vote NDP and enter the Twilight Zone or Vote ULP and be plagued by corruption… the people can’t catch a break lol.

Comments are closed.