Holy Cross Voters Warned
By Candia Dames
24th November 2004
Constituents of Holy Cross who filed a summons in the Supreme Court in support of their Member of Parliament Sidney Stubbs could be in contempt of court, Chief Justice Sir Burton Hall determined on Tuesday.
The summons was actually filed by three constituents seeking to intervene in the proceedings, who also presented what purports to be a petition signed by 180 voters.
The current register has 3,912 registered voters in Holy Cross.
Sir Burton said in each case, the constituent describes himself as a “registered voter in the Holy Cross constituency” and “professes his satisfaction with the judgment debtor (Mr. Stubbs) as his representative.”
He said the application from Mr. Stubbs to have his bankruptcy order set aside or annulled arises out of a private matter and has nothing to do with the constituents.
“The filing of the summons on 17 November and the supporting affidavits raise serious questions as to whether it is an attempt to interfere with the due administration of justice by intimidating the court or the other party to the litigation by the demonstration of the popular support the judgment debtor has in his capacity as a Member of Parliament, irrespective of the merits of his case,” Sir Burton said.
He added, “I trust that parties to actions, and their counsel, would consider carefully the correctitude of documents which they think to file in court. In this case, I choose not to pursue further the question of contempt and take the course of striking out the summons and affidavits as irrelevant to any issue now before the court and an abuse of its process.”
Mr. Stubbs has insisted throughout the legal fight to have the bankruptcy order against him set aside that he continues to have the full support of his constituents.
He has said that he continues to work in Holy Cross as its MP, although the outstanding case is preventing him from taking his seat in the House of Assembly.
On Tuesday, Sir Burton dismissed Mr. Stubbs’s application to have his bankruptcy order overturned and indicated that the Supreme Court was not hearing an appeal in this matter.
Sir Burton, however, said that if Mr. Stubbs’s counsel can say that he does not have an appeal active before the Privy Council, the Supreme Court would be in a position to consider an application for annulment.
An annulment of the order would acknowledge that Mr. Stubbs has paid his debt and is no longer a bankrupt.
But he can only hold onto his seat if he has a pending appeal.
Attorney Wayne Munroe, who represents the MP’s former creditor, Gina Gonzalez, has insisted that Mr. Stubbs does not have any active appeal.