By Mohamed Foday Conteh
Justice Adrian Fisher of the High Court has ruled against Dr. Sylvia Blyden’s application to be an added plaintiff in the ongoing intra-party matter between Alfred Peter Conteh versus the APC party and some big wigs within the main opposition.
Justice Fisher gave his ruling on Monday 8th November this year at the High Court in Freetown.
“Her presence is not necessary in this litigation for the purpose of determining the issues,” the Judge said.
He added that her presence will merely lengthen the proceedings and will have litigating issues that have already been addressed by the defendants.
The ruling followed Dr. Blyden’s application to be an added plaintiff in the matter between the APC diaspora member Conteh against former President Ernest Bai Koroma, Alhaji Osman Foday Yansaneh and the party, on allegations of it being undemocratic and that some of its members are illegal. It is against this backdrop after several sittings that Justice Fisher ruled that the party should hold a convention in order to adopt a new constitution.
It was after the new constitution was adopted by the party at the Makeni Convention in September this year that Dr. Blyden filed an application to the High Court to be included as plaintiff in the matter. She filed an affidavit in court with 17 exhibits on the 19th of October this year.
Ibrahim Mansaray, counsel for the first defendant, former president Koroma raised an objection citing that some elements of the affidavit of Dr. Blyden were scandalous and meant to smear the image of his client. The lawyer also objected that the numbering of the affidavit is defective.
Counsel representing Yansaneh, the second defendant also objected to the affidavit by Dr. Blyden. He said the affidavit was not in a proper format and issues raised were fresh and if allowed, will change the face of the matter.
Lawyer Ady Macauley, representing the APC Party objected to the affidavit saying that the inclusion of Dr. Blyden will also affect the existing plaintiff.
Meanwhile, counsel for Conteh; the existing plaintiff, Jesse Jengo objected to Dr. Blyden being added as a plaintiff in the matter. He said that the inclusion of Dr. Blyden will slow the pace of the matter.
The judge said Dr. Blyden being a litigant in person could be faced with challenges like working in an alien environment, lacking necessary expertise in law, frustration and excitement especially when faced with a team of lawyers.
He also stated that the bone of contention on which Dr. Blyden filed her application was almost the same as to the one filed by Conteh.
The judge also affirmed that the major difference is that Conteh’s application is scanty as compared to Dr. Blyden’s application.
“They both raised issues of illegality and undemocratic practices within the APC party,” Justice Fisher said. He added that both Conteh and Dr. Blyden targeted individuals they believe to be undemocratic but that Dr. Blyden went in-depth into the level of illegality and undemocratic practices.
Lawyers for the defendants pleaded with the judge to grant them an injunction for an adoption of a new constitution.
The judge drew reference to an argument made by Dr. Blyden in the previous sitting on an existing APC Constitution in 1991. The judge said that there is no litigation in court with regards the said constitution.
He said that the court will not order the defendants to produce such constitution since they have adopted a new constitution and Dr. Blyden’s application for such would have been upheld, had she made an earlier application before the new constitution.
He asked the leadership of the party to address the point raised by Dr. Blyden internally, if they so wish to avoid litigation in the future.
The ruling against Dr. Blyden came at no cost after the defendants refused to accept cost from her.
Meanwhile, the matter has been allowed to continue with Conteh as the plaintiff against the party and its other heavy weights.
Copyright © Politico Online 10/11/21
