The Freetown High Court No 2, presided over by Gambian Judge Mary Sey, yesterday heard the matter filed in by the Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) against the chairperson of NEC, Dr Christiana Thorpe, and the commission itself.
Representing the SLPP were Dr Bu- Buakei Jabbie, D.B Quee, Sulaiman Banja Tejan Sei and B.N Ngakui whilst lawyer Reginald S.Fynn represented NEC.
The All People’s Congress (APC) expressed its desire to be heard, and it was represented by lawyers Amadu Koroma, M.M Kamara, L. Dumbuya, A. Fornah, A. Macauley and Mrs Massallay.
Lawyer Amadu Koroma informed the court that the APC would want to be joined in the matter as co-defendant and as a party they were interested as any other from the court’s proceedings as it might directly affect their party.
But Justice Mary Sey demanded that the NEC commissioner appear in court, and said the affidavit must be with her if the NEC commissioner was served as she would make orders based on the application before her.
The judge also said the plaintiff should make sure both leaders of the two parties appear in court.
Lawyer Jabbie appealed that in view of the great urgency and timeframe of the matter and the unavailability in the precincts of Freetown of the 1st defendant in particular and the high duty commitment of the said defendant, it proved difficult to execute that service.
But Justice Sey stood her ground despite information that the bailiff who took the affidavit to the NEC commissioner was around to explain. The judge queried that suppose the defendant had finished counting what would she do.
Justice Sey referred the matter to noon by which time she would have typed and signed her orders to all the parties concerned, more so when the APC wanted to be part of the matter.
At the adjourned time lawyer D.B. Quee asked for an adjournment as he said his colleagues were not around and he did not have the papers.
Reginald Fynn objected on the grounds that they were not served with the orders as directed by the court, and said it appeared that there would be no actions as it would be a fruitless endeavour.
He said they were not objecting to the application for an adjournment but were rather applying for the matter to be struck off. The APC representation opposed to the application for adjournment, pointing out that the court gave specific orders that morning but that they were not complied with, not perfected and not served.
Their lead counsel, Amadu Koroma, also said no reason was given by the solicitors of the plaintiff for failing to comply as it was not only a discourtesy to the court but contemptuous to the court.
He too applied for the notice of motion to be struck out as the action was of no moment necessary.
Lawyer Quee replied that their action was not contemptuous as the motion was not drawn up because of the exigency of the situation, the timing of drawing it and executing it did not give ample time.
The Gambian Judge ruled that since she observed that the affidavits were not served, she would neither strike nor take an action until all the orders were served to the various parties to the conflict.