1 week ago
7
The Revising Court in Punta Gorda has ruled that it can hear objections against the registration of six people on the Toledo East voters’ list. The decision dismisses a preliminary argument raised by attorney Leeroy Banner, who represents the six respondents, including former Senator Bevington Cal. The objections were filed by Punta Gorda resident Leroy Ned Supaul. He is challenging the six registrations on the basis that the applicants do not live at the addresses they provided in Punta Gorda Town. Before the court could examine that question, Banner argued that Supaul’s objections were filed too late. Under the Representation of the People Act, objections must be submitted by the twenty-fifth day of the month. In this case, they were filed on July 27. When the matter first came before the court last Thursday, Banner explained why he believed the deadline could not be extended. Here is that interview.
Leroy Banner, Attorney: “What happened today is that the matter came up for the first hearing, but we made a preliminary objection. We are saying that when the objections were filed on the 27th of July, 2026 it was out of time. Because the Representation of People’s Act is clear that once you are objecting you must file those objections by the 25th of the month. We say that there is no discretion to extend time. So our objection is that this matter should not go forward because the objector Mr. Supal, when he lodged towards the objection, he was not within the prescribed time frame. So the magistrate had ordered for us to be written submissions which we must do by tomorrow’s end of business and we come back here on the third, which is next week’s Monday because these matters should be wrapped up by the 5th of August. So we return on the 5th. In the meantime also Mr. Elrington had made objection. He is also requesting that the Elections and Boundaries provide him and his objector with the investigation sheet which we say that under the law there is no obligation by Elections and Boundaries to provide him with any assistance. Mr Supal is objecting that these persons do not live at this address so we say that the onus is on him to prove his case so on Monday we have some legal arguments and depends on how it goes the matter, may or may not proceed to trial.”
Reporter: So you are representing the 6 persons?
Leroy Banner, Attorney: “Yes, we say that they have always complied with the Representation of People’s Act and that they live where they say they live but that is for the magistrate to determine next week.”
Attorney Orson J. Elrington, who represents Supaul, disagreed. He argued that July 25 fell on a Saturday and that the Interpretation Act therefore allowed the objections to be filed on the next business day, Monday, July 27. The court accepted Elrington’s argument. In its ruling, it found that the filing was valid because the statutory deadline fell on a weekend. It therefore dismissed Banner’s preliminary objection and confirmed that it has jurisdiction to hear the cases. The decision does not determine whether the six individuals are properly registered. It only settles the question of whether Supaul’s objections were filed on time. The court must now consider the main issue: whether each respondent meets the residency requirement to remain registered at the stated address in the Toledo East Electoral Division
English (US) ·