Tomuriesa wins case

By TODAGIA KELOLA

THE Election petition challenging the win of Kiriwina Goodenough MP, Douglas Tomuriesa by the runner up, Leonard Louma has been thrown out by the National Court on the grounds that there was no evidence to support and prove the allegations.
The trial which was to run for three days, was stopped by the presiding Judge, Justice Derek Hartshorn, after lawyer for the 1st respondent, David Dotaona, successfully argued that the petitioner when presenting his case did not produce any material evidence to prove the elements of their case.
The petitioner, Leonard Louma had raised 23 grounds of bribery allegations and one ground of qualification.
In the bribery grounds, he had listed a number of occasions where Mr Tomuriesa had allegedly offered cash to individual villagers and entire villages. On the ground of qualification, Mr Louma alleges that Tomuriesa was not born in the electorate and that he did not reside in the electorate continuously over a two year period.
On the first day of trial, nine grounds were struck out by the court whilst 14 were allowed to proceed.
The petitioner closed its case after calling six witnesses and the lawyer for Tomuriesa, David Dotaona, made an application to stop the trial supported by counsel for the second and third respondents, on the basis that there was no evidence to prove material elements of the petitioner’s case. Justice Hartshorn in upholding Dotaonas application to stop the trial said: “the fact that a person allegedly bribed was at the material time an elector, is a material element that must be proved in an allegation of bribery in an election petition. Here, as submitted by counsel for the first respondent, from a review of the evidence adduced, there is no evidence that the persons allegedly bribed in the grounds are persons whose names appeared on the Common Roll as electors. That a person may have voted in the General Election is not evidence that he was entitled to vote. The Common Roll in respect of the persons allegedly bribed could have been produced to prove that they were electors.”
He dismissed the entire bribery grounds. The court ordered that the petition is stopped and that the petitioner pay the respondents the costs of and incidental to the petition.