Tweet
ALLEGATIONS of open voting attempts by the Jamaica Labour Party's Andrew Holness to intimidate electoral officials and various other irregularities were brought before the Election Court. On Wednesday the court also
noted that the allegations were serious and Holness did not file an affidavit in relation to those allegations.
Dudley Thompson, QC, who represented Dr. Warren Blake, the People's National Party candidate, said the affidavits filed in court have not been denied. He said there were criminal elements and asked that the files be sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).Mr. Thompson said he hoped the DPP will demonstrate that such things "will not be put up with in the future". He asked the court to make pronouncements that "this sort of atmosphere "which existed in the constituency on election day, December 18 last year, will not be tolerated. He also asked the court to make a ruling as to whether a person can vote openly. He said there was an obligation to the general public to see to it that the secrecy of ballots was preserved. An affidavit was given that Holness and supporters went to polling division 72 at 11.30 a.m.
On electionday, and said that the polling division should have been at a different location. The presiding officer said they wanted to take the ballot box to St. Stephens' School. The presiding officer said in her affidavit, Holness attempted to 'box' her. She said soldiers intervened saying that the' box should not be removed. The affidavit disclosed that in PD 72 a total of 338 votes were cast for Dr. Blake, 7 votes for Holness and 1 for Steve Daley, the National Democratic Movement candidate at the preliminary count On December 22 at the final count, the box was empty. The presiding officer then expressed shock that the ballots were missing. Attorney-at-law Ruby Walcott submitted that the affidavits presented before the court, were not credible because they were taken from presiding officers and poll clerks who were employed to the Electoral Office. She submitted there were no affidavits from electors in the constituency and that irregularities outlined could apply to every constituency. The irregularities outlined were not sufficient to substantiate distortion of the electoral process, she said.
- Rudolph Brown
March 6, 1998
http://jamaicagotsoul2.blogspot.com/view/classic
Comment