Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Vanuatu Election Dispute Committee

  Download original PDF

Abraham v Electoral Commission [2009] VUEDC 1; EDC Election Dispute 02 of 2007 (24 August 2009)

IN THE ELECTION DISPUTE COMMITTEE
FOR THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU

Election Dispute Case No. 2 of 2007

BETWEEN:

SELA ABRAHAM
Petitioner

AND:

ELECTORAL COMMISSION
Respondent

Coram: Nesbeth Wilson (Chairperson)
Cherol Ala (Member)
Selwyn Garu (Member)

Mr George Boa appears for the Petitioner
Mr Frederick Gilu appears for the Respondent

DECISION

The Petitioner in this case was a candidate contesting the Samna Provincial Election in 2007. He obtained the same valid votes cast as one declared candidate Mr Edward Titipaia of 237 votes each. Mr Titipaia was then declared the last successful elected member of the Sanma Provincial Council on the basis that he was the eldest. The names of the elected persons to the Sanma Provincial Government were gazette on the 30^th September 2007. The Petitioner filed his Petition in the Supreme Court at Luganville. The Petition was not dated and there is no filing date on the document received by the Committee.

The Petitioner now challenges the election of Mr Titipaia on the grounds that the Electoral Commission failed to consider the two candidate's birth certificates, and that the Petitioner is the oldest candidate. The Supreme Court in Luganville heard the matter by way of preliminary issue of whether it has jurisdiction to hear this election petition at first instance. The Court found that the matter should be heard and determined by the Election Dispute Committee and ruled accordingly.

The Petitioner seeks an order quashing the declaration of the election of Mr Titipaia Edward as councilor to Sanma Provincial Council and an order declaring the Respondent to declare Sela Abraham as duly elected councilor to the Sanma Provincial Council.

After the Supreme Court made the order on the 13 December 2007, the members of the Election Dispute Committee were appointed on the 19 June 2008. The Committee received the documents on the 9 October 2008 at 9.45am.

On or about 9 April 2009 the Committee directed the parties to provide records in relation to the release of the Petition from the Court Registry in Luganville and if there any records of any payment of deposit.

Another direction was made on or about 8 July 2009 directing counsels to make submissions in relation to the validity of the Petition, and the matter was adjourned to the 4^th of August for the committee to make ruling on the issue.

The Petitioner's counsel filed his submission on the 17^th