‘Candidate X’ disqualified from election

| 18/04/2017 | 110 Comments

(CNS): The chief justice has ruled that a spent conviction for dishonesty has disqualified a candidate from office. As a result of a court order, however, the media has been banned from identifying the candidate to protect his character. Chief Justice Anthony Smellie found that there are conditions on the rehabilitation of an offender that are not absolute and the constitutional provision that bars people running for public office if they have ever been convicted of any dishonesty offence is one of those exceptions.

The chief justice read only the conclusion of his decision Monday, following the hearing before the court last week, where local attorney Graham Hampson argued that his client’s conviction, which dates back to the early 1990’s, was spent and the entire purpose of spent convictions is to allow a person to regain their full good character.

But the country’s top judge found that for the purposes of standing for public office, his spent conviction still bars him from running for election as a member of the Legislative Assembly. He said this was down to public interest and that the constitution was clear that any dishonesty offence was enough to disqualify a candidate because the goal was to ensure only people “of high integrity” have the opportunity to stand for public office.

The court is also considering two other cases that relate to issues of status and citizenship.

Check back to CNS through this week for more on issues relating to candidate qualifications.

Tags:

Category: 2017 General Elections, Elections, Politics

Comments (110)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Caymanian says:

    Okay. The media is not allowed to state who it is EXACTLY….Huuummm

    So…..these are the culprits scheduled to meet with the Chief Justice over various potential issues that could disqualify them from holding office…This is as per a previous article located here http://caymannewsservice.com/elections2017/2017/04/10/election-queries-to-be-heard-behind-closed-doors/

    – Nickolas DaCosta
    – Mario Rankine
    – Alric Lindsey

    As per the article two candidates have loyalty issues being that they hold US Citizenship and the other has a dishonesty issue. We know now from a recent article here https://caymannewsservice.com/2017/04/youngest-candidate-regrettably-out-of-race/ – That Mr. Nickolas DaCosta was disqualified from holding office due to his US Citizenship and Residency leaving just the latter two. One of these two also apparently holds a US Citizenship while the other has had some dishonesty issues.

    Mr. Alric Lindsay is a young local attorney running in GT South and Mr. Mario Rankine is running in Newlands.

    I would hope that the local bar association would not allow people with a history of dishonesty to obtain the right to practice law in the Cayman Islands. If it is found to be the attorney then questions should be raised as to the quality of our lawyers here in Cayman but only time will tell which is which.

    I guess only a process of elimination would enlighten us to who that dishonest person could be.

    CNS – Any news on the court decisions on the latter two as yet?




    0



    0
  2. Anonymous says:

    So after you have been disqualified shouldn’t the elections’ officers ensure that the billboards be removed so as not to mislead the electorate? Could he now be charged with false advertising? And by the way, why can’t we extend this rule to the people that appear on the talk shows, that is, if you have a past conviction you are automatically barred from appearing on any media talk show forever as well.




    10



    0
  3. Anonymous says:

    You know what I’m waiting for?
    To see what Candidate X is now going to issue as a public statement in response to all of this. Knowing him he won’t keep his know it all trap shut, and by all means he has a right to speak but still… This I wait for with my rum and coke and cigar in hand. Will make for entertaining reading.




    12



    0
  4. Anonymous says:

    “…banned from identifying the candidate to protect his character” ROTFL “character”
    I think he solidified his character on the BBC program.




    18



    0
  5. Anonymous says:

    What does Whodatis have to say about this?




    11



    0
    • Jotnar says:

      Its all the fault of colonialism. The man wouldn’t have done it had he not need forced to do it by the repressive system under which he was brought up. And Donald Trump/Tony Blair/Brexiteers/Remaineers have done far worse, so its ok.




      4



      3
    • Anonymous says:

      Sorry, but you will have to elaborate a bit on your question.
      Why do you (and your supporters) believe this matter is of special importance to Whodatis?
      I ain’t him and he ain’t me. Nor have I ever expressed support or endorsement of “Candidate X”.

      – Who

      *Btw, if anything, this is a win for Cayman – for at least we are removing dishonest potential politicians before they come into power and create political shambles and carry out war crimes.

      Jus sayin …

      **Lastly, it is so cute that speculation over my opinion lays so heavy on the minds of so many – white robe wearers and otherwise.




      4



      2
  6. Anonymous says:

    Math for dummies

    2 people + X have a court date with Chief Justice.
    2 people still have case before Chief Justice.
    X = ?




    14



    1
  7. Anonymous says:

    What is the point of a privacy order when 5 minutes on the internet let’s one identify Mr X? He put his past into issue by standing for public office when he was not eligible. He should not be allowed to hide behind privacy now. What if he stood next time? There is public interest in knowing his name.




    26



    0
    • Anonymous says:

      Protecting the character of someone convicted of dishonesty!




      20



      0
      • Anonymous says:

        There should be disqualification for supply or intent to supply illegal drugs like cocaine, because any future rep who would seek to destroy a person, family and society for money doesn’t deserve to be in the LA.




        1



        0
    • Anonymous says:

      The point is that the Chief Justice is not going to allow the Grand Court to be used to further disseminate the identity of the candidate, plain and simple. I’m sure he knows that you can find it if you want to, he just will not make the institution a party to providing that information – rightly so in my opinion.




      3



      2
  8. Anonymous says:

    From the early 90s,so what happened isn’t their record supposed to be clean after a certain amount of years,ahh boy caymanians will never get a head in our own country,Mr X you should sue the judicial system for defamation of character,ain’t no way someone’s record should be tainted for almost 2decades now,remember the law changed a few months ago,so X shouldn’t have a criminal record.




    11



    67
  9. Anonymous says:

    Court documents showing that other candidates have debts must have been copied from the Civil Registry. A memo was sent out advising that no copies will be permitted in future, only note-taking! Quite a surprise considering the Civil Registry has been selling photocopier cards for years. This will dramatically reduce the access that the public, press and legitimately interested parties have in finding out about ongoing litigation. Just one more casualty of this election…thanks deadbeat candidates.




    21



    1
  10. Anonymous says:

    Super!




    12



    2
  11. Question says:

    Can we just declare Suckoo the winner in Newlands and done ? I am sorry but, Wayne only comes around election time, Suckoo has been on the ground all along and he tries to do a little more than just write a check to make you go away and stop bothering him. I remember meeting with Panton to discuss my foreclosure situation and his advice was I needed to manage my money better? What money ? I was barely making minimum wage and could not make ends meet and there he was telling me to manage my money better. We are not all born into money.




    29



    67
    • Ok prejudice panton says:

      Truth.




      12



      29
      • Anonymous says:

        Nonsense. Wayne wasn’t born into money. And I bet he didn’t just tell anyone that they just needed to manage their money better. No one has done more than Wayne and Marco in addressing the concerns of homeowners with banks. The fact is that too many people wait until it is way too late to ask for advice and assistance. Even so many took advantage of the financial management seminars they organized in different districts and benefited from the one on one advice from retired bankers who could provide accurate advice based on their “inside” knowledge.




        8



        1
    • Anonymous says:

      Only someone with money to manage would say that.




      19



      16
    • Anonymous says:

      Suckoo is a politician, and only a politician. That’s why he is hitting the ground so hard, making sure he can sit and do nothing and collect a big paycheck. Wayne doesn’t need to be in government, but he is doing it for love of country, not a paycheck.




      51



      25
      • Anonymous says:

        The man is a professional IT manager and had businesses before he entered politics. He isn’t ONLY a politician. You do realise this was his first stint in politics WTH you think he was doing professionally before that? Please do not procreate. Wayne Panton was given a payout to rival his age when he retired and he was always paid well so respectfully he cannot relate to someone who is earning less. I earn a good salary, half of which goes to raising a child with special needs so I find it hard too. I still cannot afford a mortgage and drive the same car for a decade. Now, while I accept my responsibility, what the poster above is saying is that many of us aren’t after just a cushy lifestyle. We want security just like anyone else. Everyone isn’t a lawyer who earns a big salary. A little empathy goes a long way is quashing the divide in Cayman. There are a lot of honest, hard working people who are functionally poor because they DO take care of their responsibilities. Cost of living, child care, medical needs, insurance can all creep up and without a significant disposable income a lot of people in Cayman find themselves in dire situations. While I don’t ask my politicians to give me anything, in this instance perhaps guiding the poster to someone with financial adviser experience would have helped them better than just saying handle your money better. When you care about people you guide them to help (which may have revealed a solution for them that they are capable of undertaking) rather than simply brush them off with an inhumane response.




        14



        10
      • Anonymous says:

        Wait what??? Suckoo is only hitting the ground (what an MLA should do) so he can sit and do nothing?? So he is working really hard so he can sit and do nothing?! Oh please you should just sign your post PPM blogger. Suckoo has been hard working all his life and his and it is easy to see. Just read his resume. And I note no one has challenged him on that. Yes he has shown up at my home and listened to my family’s concerns. Yes he has actually gone into the LA and fought for us. Maybe your issue is you don’t understand what an MLA is supposed to do. But alas, if Wayne Panton is your example it’s little wonder you are lost. Anyone who holds even a short conversation with this man willleave understanding the truth. He cares little for you and less for your troubles. Suckoo all the way. Newland’s will be well represented by this man of the people.




        4



        10
    • My heart is pure and my hands are clean says:

      Okay… So you’re looking for an MLA who is all about handouts and not the bigger picture, which is successfully running a country.

      The problem with Cayman is there are too many voters like you who just want handouts and where does that get you? No where! If you can’t afford the place sell it and downsize.

      Panton is right, don’t live beyond your means.




      53



      11
      • Walk the plank says:

        Hey, your assumption allowed you to miss the POINT. How can someone who doesn’t get the ability to live at all, live beyond ANY means?

        How did you miss that? The OP, prob wasn’t even living beyond THEIR means.

        None the less, they were fed a “money management 101” crash course by an already monetarily rich politician, really the best move? Yes, if he were NOT “elected” to create EQUAL opportunities to citizens – meaning equal rights to earn even half his FAT STACKS.

        There exist the RICH who “beg” the RICHER too!!! Here, take this L.




        7



        7
      • Please read the comment before commenting says:

        How can you live beyond your means on $6/hour min wage ? You can’t even live on that! That is something Mr Panton will struggle with, he does not connect with the average Caymanian




        9



        6
    • Party On Wayne! says:

      Well said Mr Panton. About time someone spoke the truth and stopped the populist bullshit. You have my vote and the 17 others I control in Newlands.

      Sell the Benz and pay your damn mortgage!




      12



      7
  12. Anonymous says:

    This comes as no surprise………having dealt with such characters who roamed the Windsor Park area back in the 1990’s.

    Good decision Hon Chief Justice, we have too many crooks and lazy asses now in the LA earning $100,000 – $120,000 CI per annum, to add one more to the possible list.




    73



    2
  13. Anonymous says:

    That you CJ and Elections Office. While X had two chances of being elected slim and none. Just allowing someone with these convictions to stand for election was a giant step backwards.

    We are not going back to the credit card abuses poorly managed projects pie in the sky developments entourage trips abroad and a general waste of our money.

    The PPM has spoiled us with steady and prudent financial management. I am going to be spoiled for another 4 years.

    Please don’t tell me that some uneducated independent who had never achieved anything in life is going to do better than the PPM.




    81



    11
  14. Anonymous says:

    I wonder if they ga disqualify the crackheads, alcoholics, continual adulterers and those that spew RIDICULOUS LIES!!!!




    51



    7
  15. Anonymous says:

    It is all so funny and foolish as the midday news said candidate X was out but called the name of other two to be decided on lol …Not calling he name won’t change he pass and it won’t make he record clear for next election..People don’t forget…




    37



    1
  16. Anonymous says:

    I don’t understand why we aren’t allowed to know. When we are to vote, it is supposed to be public who the eligible candidates are.




    36



    0
    • Fred says:

      Well anyone who read a paper last week knows, but if you didn’t, not to worry. His name won’t be on the ballot so you won’t be able to vote for any ineligible candidate by mistake.




      24



      0
  17. Anonymous says:

    The Cayman courts’ secrecy is curious. This person’s identity was reported in the media at the time his qualifications were first challenged. In fact your own article on 4/11 gives his name. What exactly is accomplished by this gag order other than to make me click back to the earlier reports? BTW did the media get to attend the hearing in chambers?




    40



    1
  18. Anonymous says:

    Sorry Who… ever you are




    15



    3
  19. Caymanian says:

    Nah na nah na…nah na nah na….hey hey hey…Good bye nah na nah na….nah na nah na….hey hey hey Good bye……See ya…..ba bye……..Damn it’s a good day….feel like going skinny dippin now…..




    28



    1
  20. Anonymous says:

    Thank you very much. X would have been a disaster.




    45



    1
  21. Fred says:

    So his anonymity must be preserved “to protect his character”, but the CJ has found that he does not have the integrity to stand for the LA?




    58



    0
  22. Anonymous says:

    Why should this individual have the luxury of anonymity, he gave up that right when he was stupid enough to stand as a candidate.




    50



    1
  23. Anonymous says:

    KT and GE that means you too can NEVER run. Thank God for that! Great decision by the judge.




    80



    1
    • Anonymous says:

      KT …thats great news. She can barely manage a FB account. Some how a FB account about the protecting the rights of Caymanians focuses on attacking Caymanian . Really?




      37



      0
      • Anonymous says:

        Maybe the new Government can give KT a job as the Internet Manager or find a position for her at CINICO where her brother hired her under an alias last name a few years ago.




        19



        0
    • Anonymous says:

      Hopefully that means that KT will give the constant diatribes on social media a rest.




      33



      0
  24. Anonymous says:

    The quality of incumbents and new candidates is very poor for the Caymans




    62



    22
    • Anonymous says:

      Where are “The Caymans”?




      39



      6
      • Anonymous says:

        They are just south of Cuba, you might miss them with your head being stuck up your own smart ass. “The Caymans” is a perfectly acceptable term. You, sir, have an affectation.




        10



        25
        • Anonymous says:

          You, sir, fail to appreciate that it is not possible to say “The Caymans” in the local dialect. Cayman is pronounced cay-MAN, not CAY-min, so, no CAY-mins here. Not a single resident of this island, Caymanian or not, refers to the islands in this way. I think you have a case of North Americanism where you feel free to call everything whatever you like whether it offends the locals or not, usually in a loud and obnoxious manner of speaking. Have some respect.




          29



          2
          • Anonymous says:

            You, sir, are incorrect. Stop trying to foist parochialisms on the educated. The term “the Caymans” is of sound and long heritage and refers to the group of islands comprising of Grand Cayman and the Lesser Caymans. It is a common methodology of nomenclature, akin the Bahamas and the Turks. So you can be offended all you like, but you are wrong to critcise the term.




            4



            15
            • Anonymous says:

              You are wrong to insist on using a term that is not nor has ever been acceptable by the locals.




              5



              0
              • Anonymous says:

                Well the Brits are happy to use it and it is their territory after all.




                0



                4
                • Anonymous says:

                  Oh, so you’re just basically hell bent on being a d*ck? Go right ahead. It certainly does nothing to help Caymanian and expatriate relations.




                  1



                  0
                  • Anonymous says:

                    If exposing local misconcpetions and affectations makes me a duck(?) then I am a duck. Quack quack.




                    0



                    0
        • Anonymous says:

          Acceptable to whom? Not to me. Thankfully you do not reside in The Virgin Islands.




          12



          4
        • Anonymous says:

          Ah, the Caymans. I love their kawnch fritters.




          13



          2
          • Anonymous says:

            Stop showing your ignorance and prejudice. PS I am not from North America and I know how to pronounce “conch”.




            4



            5
        • frangipani says:

          Sorry for you. We are the Cayman Islands……….not the Caymans!!!!




          7



          0
  25. Ambassador of Absurdistan says:

    The time has come Cayman to EXPOSE:

    ALL the women beaters, crooked deals and dealers, kick back takers, cheaters, misogynists, drug users, tyrants, abusers of power, those in the closet, paedophiles, drunks, religious zealots, homosexuals, con artists, bigots, racists, drug dealers, dead beat dads, fake christians, bible bashers, fascists, sellouts, facilitators of corruption, anti-Caymanians, anti-expatriates, those in it for the paychecks pension and the prestige of public office




    63



    10
  26. A Nony Mouse says:

    When the candidate is removed from the election rolls, it will be common knowledge who it was. This is a small community and you cannot keep such a ruling secret. Obviously this election rotation will be getting quite interesting with 2 more challenges being adjudicated currently. Stay tuned!




    57



    0
  27. Anonymous says:

    When you live in glass house, don’t throw stones




    54



    1
  28. Crash and Burn says:

    Well that came crashing down all too quickly, didn’t it?




    35



    0
  29. Anonymous says:

    This makes no sense. I can understand not releasing the name during trial, but now that a decision is made the public needs to know who it is. Obviously we will find out when the ballots are released……because X’s name won’t be on it.

    It’s our election, our vote, and the CJ is saying we’re not allowed to know?

    I’m completely baffled.




    76



    1
    • Anonymous says:

      I agree with you. I feel the exact same way. They keep hiding things from us THE PUBLIC saying that it is not in our best interest to know. This is getting ridiculous to be honest.




      19



      3
    • Anonymous says:

      Note that the CJ read only the conclusion of his decision (according to the report). As you note this can’t be kept secret for long so my guess is the X is just temporary. As there’s two more challenges to go they’re probably trying to get decisions out ASAP and then can go back and issue the full judgements while the campaigns continue. At which point the X will fall away. – But that’s just my logic.




      3



      1
  30. Anonymous says:

    If we are worried about dishonesty know a few members of the current government that need to be disqualified!




    51



    15
  31. Anonymous says:

    Do us a favour – everybody knows who it is!




    49



    3
  32. Anonymous says:

    Great. Can we retire the incumbents and postpone the elections for 4 more years.
    I do not want my children growing up having to hate these political liars.




    26



    15
  33. Anonymous says:

    Good decision, that should put to rest of some of the past MLAs that are hoping to run in the future.




    49



    3
    • Anonymous says:

      Trouble is several of those disgraced politicians are already acting as advisers to this new group of power thirsty candidates.




      35



      2
  34. Anonymous says:

    Yes!!!!!!!




    44



    2

Please include your email address in the form below if you are using your real name. You can use a pseudonym, with or without leaving an email address, or just leave the form blank to be "Anonymous". All comments will be moderated before they are published. Please read the CNS Comment Policy at the top of this page.