Itula again knocks on Supreme Court’s door
JEMIMA BEUKES
Independent presidential candidate Panduleni Itula has asked that the Supreme Court set a date for a review of its decision not to nullify last year’s presidential election despite finding that the use of electronic voting machines (EVMs) without a verifiable paper trail was unconstitutional.
Itula yesterday gave notice to the registrar of the Office of the Judiciary that a court date should be assigned to hear his review application.
Last year, after the November poll, Itula challenged the use of EVMs without a verifiable paper trail and sought to have the election nullified. He wanted the Supreme Court to order a rerun.
The court ruled early last month that the use of EVMs during the election was unconstitutional, but said no evidence was placed before it to suggest that this affected the overall outcome of the November elections.
Days later Itula returned to the court to demand a review, but the Supreme Court registrar then said the matter had been finalised and that his review application would not be entertained.
Itula, through his lawyer Elize Angula, then responded by saying the registrar does not have the authority to inform him of the status of the review application and questioned why it was struck from the roll.
“Your response significantly does not purport to be written on behalf of the five judges comprising the court empanelled to hear the matter and who delivered the judgement to which the notice pertains,” Angula wrote to the registrar.
“In any event, to our client’s knowledge, the five judges have not convened (least of all in an open court, and accordingly with the parties in any hearing) to deal with the notice and supporting affidavits, and now answering and replying affidavits filed by all active parties.
“Nor, equally, does your letter purport to have been addressed to us at the behest of the chief justice. Thus, the letter is not from the chief justice,” Angula added.
President Hage Geingob garnered 56.3% of the presidential vote, a massive decline from the 87% he had received in 2014, while Itula received nearly 30%. If Geingob had received less than 50+1% of the vote, an automatic rerun would have been held.
[email protected]
Independent presidential candidate Panduleni Itula has asked that the Supreme Court set a date for a review of its decision not to nullify last year’s presidential election despite finding that the use of electronic voting machines (EVMs) without a verifiable paper trail was unconstitutional.
Itula yesterday gave notice to the registrar of the Office of the Judiciary that a court date should be assigned to hear his review application.
Last year, after the November poll, Itula challenged the use of EVMs without a verifiable paper trail and sought to have the election nullified. He wanted the Supreme Court to order a rerun.
The court ruled early last month that the use of EVMs during the election was unconstitutional, but said no evidence was placed before it to suggest that this affected the overall outcome of the November elections.
Days later Itula returned to the court to demand a review, but the Supreme Court registrar then said the matter had been finalised and that his review application would not be entertained.
Itula, through his lawyer Elize Angula, then responded by saying the registrar does not have the authority to inform him of the status of the review application and questioned why it was struck from the roll.
“Your response significantly does not purport to be written on behalf of the five judges comprising the court empanelled to hear the matter and who delivered the judgement to which the notice pertains,” Angula wrote to the registrar.
“In any event, to our client’s knowledge, the five judges have not convened (least of all in an open court, and accordingly with the parties in any hearing) to deal with the notice and supporting affidavits, and now answering and replying affidavits filed by all active parties.
“Nor, equally, does your letter purport to have been addressed to us at the behest of the chief justice. Thus, the letter is not from the chief justice,” Angula added.
President Hage Geingob garnered 56.3% of the presidential vote, a massive decline from the 87% he had received in 2014, while Itula received nearly 30%. If Geingob had received less than 50+1% of the vote, an automatic rerun would have been held.
[email protected]
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article