Aikman rebuffed on 72 registration challenges
The courtroom of Chief Magistrate Herbert Lord was the venue this afternoon for some high drama that bore amazing resemblance to a scene played out in 1984. The principal actor was the same, as U.D.P. standard bearer for the Fort George division Derek Aikman tried to get one hundred and five names removed from the voters list in his constituency. Starting with objections from the supplementary list for July, it soon became apparent that it would be an uphill battle for the Aikman’s camp as three of the objections were struck down and two withdrawn. Things didn’t get any better when the general list was brought up and when he left the courtroom late this evening, Derek Aikman was clearly not a happy man. Not a single objection was approved by the Magistrate.
Derek Aikman, Fort George Standard Bearer, U.D.P.
“First of all when the Magistrate announced that we would have reconvened today in court at two thirty, none of the U.D.P. lawyers were in the courtroom. I asked him could he defer the date for commencement to check out whether the attorneys for the U.D.P. would be available at two thirty this afternoon. None of them were there; he refused to grant that latitude. As feared the lawyers for the U.D.P. were otherwise occupied today so none of them could be here today at two thirty. So we were clearly at a disadvantage having not one legal person here which he did not give room for.”
P.J.
“But in the end most of the objectors had no grounds for their objections and the judge…”
Derek Aikman
“That is not so; that is not so. We need to challenge first, we will be appealing his decisions. I want to make that very clear. First time I am hearing that you need to know the voter to object to the voter. If you knew the voter you wouldn’t have to be objecting. It’s because you cannot find the person, you have no idea where the person is, nobody knows the person, how can you know the person to object to them. That is the first ground.
The second thing about you having to bring somebody from the house to say that the person is not living there. There are many other forms of evidence. He has set rules today that you have to live in the house. The voters were not brought on the witness stand to give evidence that they do not live there.
So as I said, we will appeal. We will appeal when the attorneys are able to fight the case, as they were not able to do today. We pleaded with him to wait until we could hear from the attorneys who were absent in court on Friday if they would be available today at two thirty. He refused, he refused so there was no attorney here for us. And a lot of the stuff that went on here today da legal manipulations and so, which the four P.U.P. lawyers were able to get away with today.”
P.J.
“You of course would know of the P.U.P.’s claim that all these objections are just a way of, to quote Mr. Smith, “just to wear down the court”.”
Derek Aikman
“Well Mr. Smith said to wear “them” down too. Obviously they are made of material that can be worn down. All I can say, they haven’t seen pressure yet.”
P.U.P. Secretary General Godfrey Smith told News Five that Aikman’s objections are baseless and nothing more than an attempt to frustrate voters whom he perceives as being P.U.P. When court resumes on Wednesday morning, Chief Magistrate Lord will deal with the remaining thirty-three names on the list. On a sidebar, Aikman was reprimanded at one point in the hearing, for comments he made to a reporter, that the Magistrate’s judgements were biased. Lord admonished Aikman that if he would not accept his rulings he should leave the courtroom.
