Lawyers for Mayor Zenaida Moya Flowers were also in the Supreme Court today. Representing the Mayor, Dr. Elson Kaseke and Godfrey Smith argued that the UDP’s national party council fundamentally violated the UDP’s own constitution when they removed Mayor Moya form that body. Surprisingly, the UDP’s attorney Michaela young agreed that there is a case to argue on that point when it goes to trial. Moya flowers attorney Elson Kaseke also argued that now that the same personalities from the NPC from the membership of the Central Executive which is investigating Moya-Flowers – the process will be tainted with bias. He also sampled a Moya affidavit in which she said that the person who she referred to as not having balls was not her party leader. And in fact extensive arguments were made in court that the meaning that it was him was teased out of her by leading questions from Jules Vasquez. Nice one. Dr. Elson Kaseke explained his arguments to us.
Dr. Elson Kaseke, Attorney for Zenaida Moya
“As a matter of law they cannot preside without raising the issue of bias. As you know the issue is not whether they have an interest in the matter but what a right minded person who knows that all the members of the CPC are almost members of the NPC. What view that person would form if he were to hear that the NPC after having expelled the Mayor as a member of the NPC they would put on their heads down and then go on and say as CPC members say we want to investigate you over the matters for which we just expelled you as a member of the NPC. That would be bias according to the legal test.”
Jules Vasquez,
“You also made the point in there that Miss Moya affidavit said she did not refer to the party leader when she made the statement about someone not having balls.”
Dr. Elson Kaseke,
“Actually you were proceeding in questioning the Mayor on a first predicate in your question. You asked her several times if the Prime Minister is out to get you and she never said that, you can read and reread the transcript of your own and you won’t find the words where she said the Prime Minister is out to get me or where she denigrated the Prime Minister in any fashion. In fact in her affidavit in court she says she holds the Prime Minister in high esteem as the party leader and agrees with his principles, his views, and so on. She is a fully committed member of the party.”
Jose Sanchez, News 5
“So who is the ball-less person she was referring to?”
Dr. Elson Kaseke,
“She said someone, your guess is as good as mine.”
Jules Vasquez,
“You said in court that not being in the CEC or being expelled from the NPC greatly disadvantages her future in politics. Do you feel that through these efforts you’ll be able to get her back onto the UDP CEC?”
Dr. Elson Kaseke,
“Look at it like this, this is one of the avenues. If she is brought before the Ethics Committee and she is tried and she is exonerated, if I might be asked to ask you that question would she be brought back within the UDP’s National Party Council.”
Jules Vasquez,
“I suspect not.”
Dr. Elson Kaseke,
“You’ve answered yourself.”
Jules Vasquez,
“But you can’t sue to be in a party, it is like suing to be n a marriage. Once of the groups in the contract wants out, what’s the use.”
Dr. Elson Kaseke,
“Well you see you have rights, you obtain legal rights, vested rights, this is a contract, the UDP constitution is a contract, just like the PUP contract or any contract of a political party. If that contract is breached, it is a matter of law. The aggrieved party has every right to come to the court for vindication.”
And we’re sorry, the attorney for the UDP was Michael Young the attorney for the UDP. He called the other sides arguments ironic and inconsistent – ironic because Mayor Moya described herself in an affidavit as elected and brought to the forefront of public attention as a fighter for sound financial management – and when she made the remarks which got her in trouble – she was charged for financial mismanagement. Young also bristled at the interpretation that Moya was not referring to the PM when she spoke about someone without balls.
Michael Young, Attorney for UDP
“I could not believe my ears with some of the submissions that were being made, meaning that I disagreed with them fundamentally. But I feel that we put forward a good case. It is really up to the judge to determine whether injunctions that they have asked for should be granted. It is really up to the judge.”
Jules Vasquez,
“If I understand the affidavit, Mayor Moya’s affidavit, she says she was not referring to the leader of the party as someone who does not have balls. Am I right?”
Michael Young,
“That is one of the reasons I was miffed. I found that to be rather remarkable because I think the language including questions and answers spoke for themselves. So I found it remarkable that these interpretations were being alleged on her part.”
Jules Vasquez,
“The council for Miss Moya argued that you were unable to clearly establish there is no taint of bias between the personalities in the NPC who are also the personalities within the CPC.”
Michael Young,
“Again there I think there is with due respect a misperception because the disciplinary proceedings would be carried out by the Ethics Committee and not really the CEC. Essentially what we are saying is that the constitution clearly gives the CEC the jutisficiton to undertake disciplinary proceedings. It starts with CEC and then it goes to the Ethics Committee and the National Party Council is really neither here nor there in relation to what the CEC can do.”
Justice Minette Hafiz has reserved her decision – she says it will come shortly.
