Vanuatu Chief Justice (CJ) Vincent Lunabek dismissed the constitutional case filed by the applicants (Former Opposition group) Friday, ruling that there was insufficient evidence to prove that the President had signed the dissolution order with a conflict of interest.
The case centred around the claim that the President had violated Article 66(2) of the Constitution by acting with a conflict of interest when signing the dissolution order. However, CJ Lunabek determined that the applicants’ submission failed to meet the required legal standards, and the court was not satisfied with the evidence provided. Therefore, the case was dismissed on the grounds of lack of evidence.
CJ Lunabek ruled that the motion to impeach the president is invalid before the court but remains valid within the office of the Speaker, not in Parliament itself. Lunabek clarified that the motion, which was brought before the court, cannot proceed due to the dissolution of Parliament. However, it can still be considered by the Speaker’s office.
The CJ further ruled that the President holds all constitutional powers necessary to dissolve Parliament upon the request of the Council of Ministers (COM). This ruling reaffirms the President’s constitutional prerogatives and powers related to the dissolution of Parliament, aligning with the constitutional framework that grants such authority under specific conditions.
CJ Lunabek’s ruling addressed two key points: whether Motion Number 7 is in order and whether the dissolution is constitutional.
Meanwhile, the former Opposition welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision but stated that this is a first-of-its-kind issue and an opinion from the Court of Appeal would be necessary. The former Opposition group are of the opinion that the Supreme Court has no authority to comment on a motion to remove the President, as it is a matter pending the Electoral College’s decision.
Following the court’s dismissal of their case, Alatoi Ishmael Kalsakau, representing the former Opposition, stated that they will meet over the weekend to consider whether to appeal the judgment. They plan to evaluate their options, particularly regarding the rationality and sustainability of the court’s decision concerning the President’s dissolution powers.
Kalsakau said the former Opposition feels there are errors in the judgment, and they believe it would be beneficial to seek another opinion from the Court of Appeal. He urged the people of the Republic to remain calm and allow the judiciary to complete its process.
Meanwhile, CJ Lunabek informed the court that the applicants have until 23 December to decide if they want to appeal the judgment. After this date, it will no longer be possible to file an appeal. This deadline gives the former Opposition a limited time frame to decide whether to challenge the ruling in the Court of Appeal.
The deadline for filing an appeal on 23 December coincides with the final date for submitting the names of candidates to contest the snap election, which has been called by the Electoral Commission for 14 January 2025.
This overlap creates a tight timeline for political parties and individuals involved in both the potential legal proceedings and the upcoming election, as they must make important decisions within the same timeframe.
