Attorney-General says Norton’s comment about Government’s legitimacy flawed

Georgetown: Leader of the People’s National Congress/Reform, Aubrey Norton is fighting for the post of Leader of the Opposition while willing to question Government’s legitimacy, but cannot provide his party’s March 2020 Statement of Polls (SoP’s) to date.

Attorney General Mohabir Anil Nandlall

This is according to Attorney General (AG) and Ministry of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall in his response to Norton’s comment to the press about Government’s legitimacy.

Norton had related at a recent press conference that: “The question of the legitimacy of the Government has to be determined by an election petition. It is not a case of the Leader of the Opposition or the Leader of the Party just deciding the Government is legitimate. Legitimacy comes from elections in this regard.’’

“Let me immediately offer my concurrence with the second sentence in the above quote. It is not within the purview, remit, or power of the Leader of the Opposition to determine the legitimacy of the Government. The corollary is also a truism: it is not within the purview, remit, or power of the Leader of the Opposition to determine the illegitimacy of the Government, either,” Nandlall stated in a Facebook post.

Noting that Norton contends that the legitimacy of the Government has to be determined by an elections petition, the Attorney General said “No Mr. Norton, you are reasoning in the reverse. The election petition may determine that the Government is illegitimate. There is a fundamental principle of law expressed in the Latin maxim, ‘’omnia praesumuntur rite esse acta [all things are presumed to be done in due form].’’ 

He continued: “This principle applies to the March 2nd, 2020, General and Regional elections. It is buttressed by several incontrovertible processes, including that those elections were observed and certified to be free, fair and credible by every local, regional and international agency invited and accredited to do so.”

Concomitantly, the Legal Affairs Minister noted that for five long months thereafter, several aspects of the tabulation of the results of those elections were thoroughly interrogated by every tier of our judicial hierarchy and eventually pronounced upon as legitimate.

Significantly, he said every single ballot was recounted, an unprecedented occurrence in modern electoral history.

That recount, he said was observed by a team described by Mr. Norton’s predecessor, no other than the sitting President at the time, Mr. David Granger as ‘’the most legitimate interlocutor.’’ This team adjudged the exercise to be transparent and credible.

The result of that recount, Nandlall said materially coincided with the SoP’s in the custody of the People’s Progressive Party/Civic and every other party (other than Mr. Norton’s) as well as those in the possession of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM).

Strikingly, he said Mr. Norton’s party is yet to disclose their Statements of Poll for anyone to examine.

It is in these circumstances that the Chairperson of GECOM declared Dr. Mohamed Irfaan Ali, to be elected President and the People’s Progressive Party/Civic the victor at those elections.

For argument sake, Nandlall said let us assume that the ‘’legitimacy of the Government has to be determined by an elections petition,’’ as Mr. Norton contends.

“His party has filed not one but two. Both were heard and dismissed by the High Court that has the jurisdiction to do so. Therefore, following Mr. Norton’s logic, the Government’s legitimacy has been determined twice by the proper constitutional forum. Admittedly, appeals have been filed against those rulings. However, Mr. Norton’s legal advisors will inform him that the filing of appeals do not, by and of themselves, operate to stay the decisions appealed against. Further, they ought to advise him that, in any event, it is juridically impossible to stay the dismissal of a case,” the Legal Affairs Minister explained.