Tonight, the Leader Of The Opposition's hold on his seat in the Freetown Division is stronger than ever - after an election petition against him was struck out of court.
Originally, the petition brought by his former opponent Lee Mark Chang - alleged that on election day, Fonseca's workers bribed voters. But in court, the allegations were not substantiated.
Our newsroom got information earlier in the week that Chang intended to withdraw because his witnesses refused to commit themselves to witness statements which were supposed to be the foundation of this case.
And so no statements were presented to Chief Justice Kenneth Benjamin in time for the first hearing today.
As a result, Chang's attorney, Michael Young, indicated that they would be forced to withdraw the petition, but the steps needed to do that were not taken. As a result, the lack of evidence was dealt with in court today.
Fonseca's attorneys, Eamon Courtenay and Godfrey Smith, filed 2 applications to have the court strike out the petition.
Young then asked the court to grant Chang more time to prepare his evidence, but Chief Justice Benjamin indicated that he cannot grant this extension because the law doesn't provide for it.
It was an abrupt end to this petition, so we spoke to both sides outside of court about what led to its failure
Here's what they had to say:
Eamon Courtenay, SC - Attorney for Francis Fonseca
"We are certainly happy that the matter has been struck out by the Learned Chief Justice. I think that it is a disgrace that Lee Mark Chang is now prepared to accept the decision of the people. They spoke very loudly and rejected his candidacy. He brought this scandalous petition before the court, and when the appointed hour came up - I understand that he is not even in the country. That is the kind of respect that he has for this court. He is not even here; his witnesses are not here. It was stillborn; it was a disgrace, and it is an abuse of the process of the court. He had given notice that he wanted to withdraw, but in order to withdraw, you have to advertise in the Gazette that you intend to withdraw, which had not been done. We had filed 2 applications to have the petition struck out, so they conceded that we would succeed on the basis that no evidence was brought forward to support the vulgar allegations made by Mr. Lee Mark Chang. The truth of the matter is, as came out in court, the witnesses were all employees of Mr. Lee Mark Chang. They know that these allegations were not true, and we were ready to prove to the court by cross-examination that there is nothing more than a naked attempt by Lee Mark Chang to get the court to give a victory which the people denied him. Fortunately, they did the appropriate thing and at least come to court and admit that they didn't have any evidence against the Honorable Francis Fonseca."
Michael Young, SC - Attorney for Lee Mark Chang
"We applied to withdraw the petition, and on their side, they applied to strike it out. What happened is that witnesses who had sworn affidavits, attesting that what they were saying in those affidavits were true, and that is the basis upon which the application was granted. And when I say that they swore affidavits, the process was something that was witness by us - more than one attorney - and they swore before commissioners of the Supreme Court, and so the evidence was filed. As things have gone on - as happens to witnesses at times in this country, as everybody knows - cool feet, so to speak, and I am not going to talk about the basis and the reasons why they had cold-feet. We had some information in that regard, but it is not something that I wish to discuss, except to say that the petitioners themselves - they proceeded on the basis of the evidence which had been given to their attorneys, and given in court. Those witnesses, after the court had ordered that witness statements be signed - in other words fresh documents being signed by these witnesses - they were unwilling to sign. So, there was no evidence to present to the court, and so, petitioners had no option but to withdraw; that's what happened. I must say that there was still some evidence left that we could have proceeded with, but in all the circumstances, we wanted the case to have certain level of credibility. And it was decided - of course the petitioners themselves, after discussion with their attorneys - they decided not to proceed."
As noted in the interview, when Chief Justice Benjamin struck the petition out, he awarded $7,500 in costs to Fonseca and his attorneys.
Email
Print