VOLUME 13 ISSUE 02

Page 1

JANUARY 14TH, 2017 – JANUARY 21ST, 2017

VOLUME 13 - NO. 02

$1.00

Sign up for FLOW TV today packages as low as

25

$

discoverflow.co

Website: www.suntci.com

Email: sun@suntci.com

Tel: (649) 348-6838

Fax: (649) 941-3281

www.facebook.com/tcisun

BY-ELECTION FOR THE BIGHT? by Hayden Boyce Publisher & Editor-in-Chief

L

awyers for the George Pratt, the People’s Democratic Movement (PDM) candidate for The Bight in the December 15th, 2016 general elections, have insisted in court documents that he should be declared the duly elected member of the House of Assembly for that constituency and not Portia Stubbs-Smith of the Progressive National Party (PNP). Alvin Garland, the lawyer for Pratt, made this claim in an election petition that was filed in the Supreme Court and which legal analysts said could pave the way for a muscular legal battle that could very well force a by-election in the constituency to settle the highly-contentious result, where Stubbs-Smith was declared winner by one (1) vote, after several recounts and both candidates’ names placed in a box and draw was done. She received 285 votes, Pratt got 284 and Dozzlie “Mister” Delancy of the Progressive Democratic Alliance (PDA), 38. On Thursday, January 12, 2017, a directions hearing in the election petition matter came before Chief Justice Margaret Ramsay-Hale, who adjourned it until March 5th, 2017 and gave lawyers from all sides until January 19th to file submissions. Queen’s Counsel Ariel Misick is Stubbs-Smith’s lawyer, while Attorney General Rhondalee Brathwaite-Knowles appeared for the Supervisor of Elections Dudley Lewis, returning officer, Arthur Forbes and presiding officer Lucile Campbell. Garland is asking the court to declare that StubbsSmith was not duly elected as a member of the House of Assembly

Opening of the Supreme Court legal year 2017

The 2017 opening of the Turks and Caicos Islands Supreme Court took place on Wednesday, January11th at the court located at the former Myrtle Rigby Health Clinic. The event was attended by a number of dignitaries, led by His Excellency Governor Dr. John Freeman. The event included a salute, inspection of the guard by Chief Justice Margaret Ramsay-Hale and a march-past. (See page 23, 24 and 25 for more photographs).

for electoral district number 6, The Bight, Providenciales and that hat the election and return of the PNP candidate as a member of the House of Assembly for electoral district number 6 be declared null and void. Garland noted that as a result of two of the three voters, unlawfully voting in electoral district number 6, may have affected the result of the election, and makes it uncertain whether the First Respondent (Stubbs-Smith) who has been returned has really been elected by the majority of persons voting at the Bight polling station. According to Garland, during the counting of the ballots for electoral district number 6, The Bight, three ballots were rejected and three ballots were spoiled. There was one ballot of the three ballots that was clearly marked for Pratt. The ballot were a perfectly good ballot, which clearly had an (“X”) marked in the center of the box next to the Petitioner’s name. He

said Pratt objected and requested that the ballot be included into the count as a valid vote for him. However, Pratt’s objection was denied by the Returning Officer, and the ballot was place into the designated envelope with the other rejected and spoiled ballots and sealed. Garland stated: “Pursuant to section 44 (8) of the Ordinance a voter who have made a mistake with his ballot paper shall return it the Presiding Officer, who shall cancel it by writing the word “SPOILED” on the ballot and deliver another ballot to the voter. However, this ballot was not marked spoiled, and should have been included into the count as a valid ballot for the Petitioner. Had the one ballot not been rejected or declared spoiled, the results would have been different, with Pratt winning the majority of the overall votes cast, and being returned as duly elected to the House of Assembly. Garland stated that pursuant to section 54 (16) of the Ordinance, whenever two or more candidates have the same amount of votes after the counting of the votes, including a recount, the Returning Officer must decide between the candidates by a lot and proceed as if the candidate on whom the lot falls had received an additional vote. He said the procedure that was conducted to elect the candidate; is the Petitioner and the First Respondent’s

each wrote their names on a half sheet of paper provided to them by the Returning Officer. The Returning Officer then folded the papers with the names and placed them into a box. The Returning Officer, then himself, place his hand into the box and draw one of the two papers from the box. Upon unfolding the paper, Stubbs-Smith was declared the winner. “The procedure carried out by the Returning Officer for electing the candidate is flawed, unreliable and or unsafe. The Returning Officer fold both papers himself, put them into the box, and draw the winning name himself. The Returning Officer should have used the Presiding Officer or another official agent to draw the name from the box. Therefore, (Pratt) cannot accept the procedure performed by the Returning Officer as a reliable and safe procedure,” he stated. CLAIMS AND OBJECTIONS Garland stated that during the Month of March 2016, and pursuant to sections 14 to 18 of the Ordinance, the Supervisor heard the claims and objections with respect to the Register of Electors. The Claims and objections hearing for the 6th electoral district, The Bight, was heard on the 2nd day of March 2016. Continued on Page 2


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.