No grounds to trigger rerun of poll in St Andrew West Central

THE EDITOR, Madam:

I am writing with reference to the article, ‘Judicial review of decision not to void poll in PM’s seat set for November 18’, published in The Gleaner on October 21.

“Section 37 of the Election Petitions Act, specifies grounds on which ‘constituted authority’ can apply to the Election Court to void (nullify) the results of a poll.” The Election Court is the Supreme Court of Jamaica.

To simplify Section 37 of the Election Petitions Act, it specifies the grounds in section 37 (e) on which the constituted authority can apply to the Election Court to void the results of a poll. Therefore, the Constituted Authority does not have the legal power “to make the decision not to void poll in PM’s seat”.

The Jamaica Labour Party winner of the St Andrew West Central seat, Dr Andrew Holness’, votes and percentage were 7,054 (58.75 per cent), and the People’s National Party’s Paul Buchanan’s votes and percentage were 4,953 (42.25 per cent), according to Jamaica Election results for the September 3 general election.

To calculate the margin of victory (MOV) without the percentage, it is 7054-4953=2101. To calculate the MOV with the percentage, it is 58.75 per cent – 41.25 per cent = 17.50 per cent.

Based on the winner’s decisive win of 2,201, I do not think the Supreme Court will call a redo because the number of ballots affected is not large enough to change the outcome of the election or otherwise call the results into question. However, there have been instances when courts call a redo election, even when the number of affected votes would not change the outcome.

Thus, in the United Kingdom, no law or constitutional convention would trigger a rerun of a general election based on the size of the margin of victory. A 17.5 per cent margin is not a valid basis for demanding a new election.

CARGILL KELLY