Petitioners won because they hid passport says lawyer for UWP

first_img Share Tweet Share LocalNews Petitioners won because they hid passport says lawyer for UWP by: – January 11, 2012 Sharecenter_img 200 Views   4 comments Sharing is caring! Geoffrey Letang: “They won becuase they hide their passport”.Attorney at Law Geoffrey Letang, one of the lawyers on the legal team representing the Petitioners; Ronald Green and Maynard Joseph, has announced that his clients lost on Tuesday because the Respondents supposedly hid their passports.The Opposition United Workers Party filed an election petition challenging the validity of the nomination of the prime minister and minister of education claiming that they were under oath of allegiance to a foreign State and as such they were disqualified from contesting the 2009 general election.On Tuesday the Petitioners election petitions were dismissed by Justice Gertel Thom who ruled that they had “failed to lead any evidence to show that Mr. Skerrit was by virtue of his own act under acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience or adherance to a foreign power of State”.However, Mr. Letang in an interview with Kairi FM News stated that the judge “refussed to allow” the Respondents; Roosevelt Skerrit and Petter Saint-Jean, to submit their passports or to testify and be cross-examined in Court.“Let me say that the Petitioners lost the case because the judge refused to allow the Respondents to submit their passport or to go in the witness box and give evidence where they would be cross examined. Their major defence; that is the Petitioners major defence is that the Petitioners did not prove that they had a passport that was their major defence. The Petitioners made application to the Court whereby requesting that the Respondents submit or disclose their passport and had the Court grant the application that would be the end of the matter.”(L-R): Petitioners; Ronald Green and Maynard JosephMr. Letang stated further that the Petitioners subpoenaed the Respondents to the witness box but that was objected by lawyers for the Respondents which the Court upheld.“The Petitioners also subpoenaed the Respondents to come to the witness box in as much as they did not disclose the passport but to come to the witness box. They made an application to object to the two subpoenas being issued, the Court upheld the objection and as a consequence set aside the subpoenas. So basically their victory is based solely of they hiding the passport, they won because they hide the passport.” Mr. Letang told reporters outside the Court on Tuesday afternoon that he would not issue any statement until he had read the judgment in its entirety.However, he told Kairi FM News that having read the judgment he is certain that there are grounds for appeal which is the next course of action for the legal team representing the Petitioners.“Having read the judgment I am convinced that there is sufficient ground for an appeal and that the Petitioners will be appealing the matter. So all is not lost and there is cogent evidence that the Petitioners did submit sufficient evidence in the Court in the absence of the passport to prove to the Court that at the time of nomination day the Respondents in question were not qualified to be so nominated and we will prove that to the Court of Appeal. We’re appealing Justice Thom’s decision, we have to respect the decision of the Court but we do not agree with her ruling or the judgment.”Mr. Letang says he “is very confident that if the matter goes to appeal that the outcome will be different”. Dominica Vibes Newslast_img

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *