A legal opinion obtained by the ruling United Progressive Party said Justice Louise Blenman erred in her judgement in favour of the opposition ALP in the election petition cases, causing a “severe constitutional crisis”.
Attorney Phillip Bree, who Caribarena.com confirmed was asked by the ruling party to provide his views on the judgement, said the future of the democratic process is at risk if the decision is allowed to stand.
The UK attorney said Justice Blenman misinterpreted case law in arriving at her decision.
In the Edgell v Glover case, Bree pointed out there was a one-vote difference between the candidates “and it was known for a fact that one of the postal votes had been counted illegally.”
“In my view, neither the facts nor the conclusions of the High Court in Edgell have any authoritative or persuasive bearing on the case before Blenman J," he said. "She was wrong to derive any legal test from Edgell; let alone to make it the bedrock of her decision-making."
He added that in the legal test set out in another case, Morgan v Simpson, the petitioner was obliged to show that the outcome of the election was a travesty or sham. But he said instead, Justice Blenman “watered down her decision-making to the legal equivalent of a shrug of the shoulders”.
Bree said the judge in effect reversed the burden of proof, placing it on the respondents.
“Further, by requiring the respondents to show that there was no effect on the outcome, the respondents are being asked to prove a negative,” he added. “The role of the courts in matters of constitutional significance is to take into account the public interest. Blenman J’s capricious approach has led to a severe constitutional crisis."
Click to read Bree's full opinion here.
Comments (29)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Mark Jenkins LLB, June 08, 2010
Why do so many people act as if they have become bereft of intelligence and wisdom to guide their mental faculties?
Rather than looking with forensic skill to attempt to impugn the bio of Attorney Philip Bree - after carefully perusing the challenging legal analysis set out in the legal Opinion signed and appended with his name - - it is clear that the author of that Opinion is a wise and learned Attorney who is highly qualified in the practise of law! Indeed, it behooves the citizens to look more closely at the Opinion in comparison to wondering if such a person exists... the judgment of Justice Louise Blenman clearly did err in her judgement in favour of the opposition ALP in the election petition cases, with the result - causing a “severe constitutional crisis”!
Rather than looking with forensic skill to attempt to impugn the bio of Attorney Philip Bree - after carefully perusing the challenging legal analysis set out in the legal Opinion signed and appended with his name - - it is clear that the author of that Opinion is a wise and learned Attorney who is highly qualified in the practise of law! Indeed, it behooves the citizens to look more closely at the Opinion in comparison to wondering if such a person exists... the judgment of Justice Louise Blenman clearly did err in her judgement in favour of the opposition ALP in the election petition cases, with the result - causing a “severe constitutional crisis”!
-
- +0
-
-
written by peaceful, April 27, 2010
The photo of the british lawyer appears to be a woman but a man's name pops up (Phillip Bree) get real
-
- +0
-
-
written by Antiguan in Great Britian, April 27, 2010
Ermm.... who are these people rying to fool? the days of fooling Antiguans and Barbudans are over UPP!!!! I just called the UK law Society trying to find this Phillip Bree dude to give him my opinion but he doesn't exist...
Everyone has the right to an opinion but the law is the law! poles must be opened for 12 hours by law! and that is what the Judge ruled on!
Everyone has the right to an opinion but the law is the law! poles must be opened for 12 hours by law! and that is what the Judge ruled on!
-
- +0
-
-
written by Sh**ly G, April 26, 2010
I was thinking the same thing, these people are so lie,God only knows if this is true,even if it IS WHO CARES? not that we are fascinated by a learned English Man. And to ARAKA, we are not concerned what happens in the US,if the US had a legitimate reason for starting late,that was not our case, our list were ready and posted in the different stations for persons to scrutinize,that was almost two wks before elections,do you really think with all your light age knowledge( you say we are in the dark ages)that it was right to begin printing an unnecessary list hours before the polls were to open? do you think that the Supervisor of elections just randomly decided to do so at the eleventh hour? The law is the law,if you brake the law you pay the penalty,its that simple,so you don't come talking about no Dark ages, IF YOU DON'T LIVE HERE KEEP OUT.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Sh**ly G , April 26, 2010
I hope it is not our money that was used to pay this person,the Upp is just grasping at straws,it really don't take a Judge to tell anyone with a little brain as small as a mustard seed that what happened on elections day last year was just simply wrong,wrong,wrong, i cant imagine and i am baffled by the reason that it happened,they must have been something very important about those Photo list,that would allow them to delay the polls for 5hrs, the Upp really just need to accept that they have fallen into one of they tangled web,and stop acting like fish out of water, i think they are all going crazy, if they know they won handsomely why are they running all around the place and blowing hot steam, them just sick sick sick ,TIME FOR THEM GO.
-
- +0
-
-
written by angry antiguan, April 26, 2010
Antigua people a tek dem dam Dunceness to another level, me would really like fu find out who Capone think responsible for wha happen election day, are u just believe ebry lie that them psychopaths tell are u, The list that dem print pan election marning,was ordered by the Chairman, the chairman get he instructions form who? A from you Capone? never in de history of Antigua that anybady a print list pan election day,a God mek the printer bruk dong,are u just illiterate and wicked, dem dig ditch and fall dong in dey,who ar u go blame fu dat, Capone an Plm,just shut ar u frigging dunce mouth.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Purple patriot, April 26, 2010
PLM and capone you both offer an opinion and you are entitled to your opinion but not your facts, we leave that to a judge. And this judge has spoken that's the only opinion that counts at the moment.
what beats me S****D is that you miss the fact that we the voters ,we the people have been affected by the late opening of the polls, so far neither of you have identified your self as legitimate registered voters .
If you are then you should be upset that your constitutional rights have been violated rather than name calling a judge. it only shows that you are both desperate UPP hangerson, the type we can do without if Antigua is to recover,S****D and rude just like your masters.
what beats me S****D is that you miss the fact that we the voters ,we the people have been affected by the late opening of the polls, so far neither of you have identified your self as legitimate registered voters .
If you are then you should be upset that your constitutional rights have been violated rather than name calling a judge. it only shows that you are both desperate UPP hangerson, the type we can do without if Antigua is to recover,S****D and rude just like your masters.
-
- +0
-
-
written by OO7, April 26, 2010
IT IS THE DECISION OF THE SITTING JUDGE THAT COUNTS. SORRY GUYS, BUT ITS TRUE
-
- +0
-
-
written by Capone, April 26, 2010
Wait let me get this are you guys saying the late opening of the polls are the UPP fault the late opening disenfranchise voters from both side of the parties as well as independent if there was one that ran..............The problem in my view is the Electorial Commisssioin they fell asleep on the job or their pocket was to fat of cash to move how they should. It is no party fault the polls were open late. The Judge decision is how she sees it how you guys not speaking about the Electorial Commission part in this fiasco. the mistake the UPP made was not to take the stand of majority of the polls in Anu & Barbuda open late and that is the fact.
-
- +0
-
-
written by fnpsr, April 26, 2010
PLM, you know that argument is just what it is - "Argument." I see you are back denigrating one's form of learning. Education is Education, no matter how one gets it. I also see you are prejudice. What difference does it make what nationality the judge is. This is the 21st century - grow up!!!!!
-
- +0
-
-
written by PLM, April 26, 2010
The QC hit the nail squarely on the head. The Guyanese certificate holder not only shifted the burden of proof to the respondents, but she saddled the UPP with proving a negative. The ALP canadidates as plaintiffs, were not required to prove anything. Their witnesses were unreliable or less than generous with the truth, but were still able to prevail. That’s some neat trick…
-
- +0
-
-
written by fnpsr, April 26, 2010
Araka, voting machines malfunction during the course of voting and the polls opening late due to lack of preparation and incompetence are two separate issues. In the US we have rules and everyone follows those rules. I am sure when you were in line until 10:30 p.m., that the registrar went to court and got permission to continue the voting as a result of the extenuating circumstances. However, I agree that the rules need to be amended to accommodate unforeseen circumstances.
-
- +0
-
-
written by fnpsr, April 26, 2010
In the Islinger case…..”If the election was conducted that it was substantially in accordance with the law as to elections, it is not vitiated by the breach of the rules or a mistake at the polls provided it did not affect the results of the elections.” Again this is going to be argument.
But in Morgan V. Simpson…….for in that situation, while it cannot be shown positively that the result was affected, it may be equally be the case that it does not appear that the result was not affected.” What Bree wanted the Judge to do is speculate as others and not apply the settled law. Then she would have been criticized for speculation.
This two page so call opinion, is nothing more that attempt to fan the flames and prejudice the impending appeal. A UK, Lawyer? What does that mean?
But in Morgan V. Simpson…….for in that situation, while it cannot be shown positively that the result was affected, it may be equally be the case that it does not appear that the result was not affected.” What Bree wanted the Judge to do is speculate as others and not apply the settled law. Then she would have been criticized for speculation.
This two page so call opinion, is nothing more that attempt to fan the flames and prejudice the impending appeal. A UK, Lawyer? What does that mean?
-
- +0
-
-
written by fnpsr, April 26, 2010
I suspect very strongly that his lawyer did not read the entire case. I believed that he only read the ruling. The one area that the court ruled on was the breach. Mr. Bree failed to discuss that in is two page opinions. The main issue here is whether the alleged breach, if any is sufficient to vitiate the election under section (32)4 of the Representative of the people Act (as amended), and have the court declare the winner was not duly elected.
You can always take sections of the law and argue it for your client as Bree did when he cited Edgell. But in Edgell, “if the election was conducted so badly that it was not in substantially in accordance with the law as to the election, the election is vitiated, irrespective of whether the result was affected or not.” This can be argued, but that is the law.
You can always take sections of the law and argue it for your client as Bree did when he cited Edgell. But in Edgell, “if the election was conducted so badly that it was not in substantially in accordance with the law as to the election, the election is vitiated, irrespective of whether the result was affected or not.” This can be argued, but that is the law.
-
- +0
-
-
written by fnpsr, April 26, 2010
First of all, this lawyer is advocating for his clients, the petitioners. He is a hired gun and he will tell them what they want to hear. I will point out his bias so you can judge for yourself. He says at paragraph 5, “The role of the courts in matters of constitutional significance is to take into account the public interest. Blenman J’s capricious approach has led to a severe constitutional crisis. The judgment lacks both the necessary balancing exercise of public interest against the need for the petitioner to discharge a high burden.” This statement is disingenuous, because the Judge said at paragraph 4, “The court is acutely aware of the national importance of their petition. It is apposite for the court to state that given the national significance of these petitioners, the court had to take great care in ensuring that deliberate consideration was given due to far reaching consequences that the decision of the court can have.” There is nothing capricious about this statement at all.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Lacrymosa, April 26, 2010
I googled his name and can find one person with the last name Bree in the world. Google keeps asking me if I mean Phillip Breen.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Lacrymosa, April 26, 2010
It would be nice Mr. Bree if you had the opinion on your letterhead so we could know if you really exist!!
-
- +0
-
-
written by Lacrymosa, April 26, 2010
Phillip Who? Does he really exist? Is he a Lawyer? Trying to google him can't find the man? Tried the UK Bar website he not on it. Please U.P.P. further the good man's particulars.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Teacher, April 26, 2010
You too seem to be misinformed hence so that you are aware, there nothing in the Representation of the people act which speaks to extending polling hours hence the polling office must open at 6am and close at 6pm as per the constitution also in Antigua we do not use electronic voting machine and the polling papers should be prepared prior to the start of polling hence your arguments although fruitful for e.g.in the USA are futile in the context of Antigua. In short the law is the law or in other words murder can’t be right when it is done as a mercy killing for some who is suffering from terminal cancer but wrong when a t***f breaks into your house and kill your child.
-
- +0
-
-
written by UncommonSense, April 26, 2010
If the learnt lawyer were to be any other color than white, the UPP would first of all, not paid that person, far less use that person's view against a highly qualified black Judge from the Caribbean. As Dr. Newton says, local is inferior and foreign is better. UPP still colonial in their thinking, thence the rationale for this paid opinion. I don't see how this is going to put food in the mouths of hungry Antiguans but I do see how that lawyer's bank account will go up at tax payers' expense.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Lacrymosa, April 26, 2010
Every Lawyer has an opinion different from the next we will see when June comes around. I think the judgment will stand especially after the Court of Appeal hears what Brother B said about the Judge. The court of Appeal will be backing Justice Blendman on this one.
-
- +0
-
-
written by araka, April 26, 2010
Antigua is in the dark ages. So what if the polls open late? It happens all the time in first world countres. I remember 2004 election in the USA, I was in line until 10:30PM at night. The polls opened late because the machines broke down. Anytime you are using machines (computers/Printers) anything can happen. I think the law should be revised and give the electorial commision the authority to extend the polling hours. It happens all the time in the USA. Get real Antigua, this is 2010 for christ sake.
-
- +0
-
-
written by UPP Supporter, April 26, 2010
My . My..
You see all we have to do is pay out some money to a lawyer who is willing to collect from the UPP as all the others and he will certainly come out swinging for us.
Alp can also go and have a paid lawyer write an opinion... and he better come out swinging for ALP otherwise he will not get paid....
Lawyers can always have opinions.. some win cases on that basis... and others lose cases... invariably however if its not a jury case its a JUDGE .. who has to make the interpretation of the law .. so my paid opinion lawyer has a serious problem it seems...maybe he should represent the UPP and present the appeal case before some other " JUDGES" and collect some MORE money from the UPP.
What is our NATIONAL debt again ?
You see all we have to do is pay out some money to a lawyer who is willing to collect from the UPP as all the others and he will certainly come out swinging for us.
Alp can also go and have a paid lawyer write an opinion... and he better come out swinging for ALP otherwise he will not get paid....
Lawyers can always have opinions.. some win cases on that basis... and others lose cases... invariably however if its not a jury case its a JUDGE .. who has to make the interpretation of the law .. so my paid opinion lawyer has a serious problem it seems...maybe he should represent the UPP and present the appeal case before some other " JUDGES" and collect some MORE money from the UPP.
What is our NATIONAL debt again ?
-
- +0
-
-
written by Antiguan Abroad, April 26, 2010
If this lawyer is so convinced that the trial judge erred on points of law, and if the UPP consulted him for a legal opinion on their chances of overturning her judgment on appeal, why are his arguments being leaked to the press and not preserved for the the appeals court? This seems like a bit of political grandstanding by the UPP for a gullible public, at best. Remember, this "learned counsel" is a paid lawyer who will fight to protect the interests of his client (or potential client).....he is not a judge. Therefore, his "opinion" must be taken for what it is....simply an opinion. Let the real arbiters of this case - the appellate court - hear and decide the matter. Only their "opinions" matter at the end of the day.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Teacher, April 26, 2010
Did this learned lawyer bother to read the constitution of Antigua and Barbuda? If he did he would have seen the part which states polling station shall be opening for 6am- to 6pm not 11am or 12pm. Therefore on that basic alone the UPP will lose their appeal. I hate people who try to mislead the ma*ses on one point and negate the most significant point.
-
- +0
-
-
written by tenman, April 26, 2010
Now this argument is the closest to a pa*sable one I have heard from the UPP side. Is the burden on the claimant to prove without doubt that persons would have voted for them? The problem here is how can you truly ascertain who someone would have voted for especially since our constitution allows persons to vote without having to declare who they voted for. If to prove your case persons would be required to state under oat who, months before, they would have voted for, that would go contrary to our constitution. Judge Blenman did the right thing considering the limitations.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Fed up, April 26, 2010
@common sense, totally agree.
Now the Judge made her ruling on the case, the UPP has appealed, ok the law permits that. Why is it that the UPP sees the need to go get a PAID Lawyer from the UK to come and challenge the decision that was made by a Judge? Lawyer, Judge, does anyone see this or only me. Come on UPP always taking Antigua people for a ride. Nothing but BS if you ask me...
Now the Judge made her ruling on the case, the UPP has appealed, ok the law permits that. Why is it that the UPP sees the need to go get a PAID Lawyer from the UK to come and challenge the decision that was made by a Judge? Lawyer, Judge, does anyone see this or only me. Come on UPP always taking Antigua people for a ride. Nothing but BS if you ask me...
-
- +0
-
-
written by Common Sense, April 26, 2010
Judge or no judge, common sense would tell a common man like me that to open a polling station 5 hours late is wrong and must have disenfranchised some voters and even if one was, then that persons constituitional right would have been violated and hence the injustice. It has been said "common sense is not always a common virtue"
-
- +0
-
-
Write comment
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Newer news items:
- ALP Condemns Baptiste's Statements
- Controversy Over Med Student's Body
- Antigua and United States sign new security treaty
- Family Rules Out Suicide
- MP says Judge Lucky To Be Here
Older news items:
- Wigley Wishes Joseph Luck
- Toddler Drowns in Gutter
- PM Meets With Edwards After PWD Bacchanal
- Search Called Off
- Walker Promises Swift Justice
This whole issue seems to be the Bird dynasty looking for straws, attack everyone else, attack the messenger, as such people cannot attack the message.
Never can they accept the facts or the laws, deceive everyone else, & always trying to smell of red roses!
Who was it that caused all our financial pain, our national debt, in Antigua & Barbua?
We the ordinary citizens now all have to suffer for the acts of an old man dictator called Bird!