Oral arguments in Suren Dayal’s election petition before the Supreme Court have ended yesterday. Dayal is seeking the invalidation of the No. 8 election. This trial has reached its final stage, i.e. the oral arguments. The written arguments have already been submitted. Justices David Chan Kan Cheong and Karina Devi Gunesh-Balaghee, who are presiding over the Suren Dayal’s election petition, announced that the judgment will be delivered at a later date. But they informed the parties involved to be ready in case the court needs further clarification.
The day’s hearing was marked by a closing argument by Robin Ramburn, Senior Counsel and a reply by Ravin Chetty, Senior Counsel.
Ravin Chetty, Pravind Jugnauth’s lawyer, was adamant in the Supreme Court. Speaking before Justices David Chan and Karuna Devi Guness-Balaghee, he said that the promise to increase the old-age pension promise should not be considered as an electoral bribe.
The aim, he said, was to bring the allowance in line with the minimum wage. It was a logical thing to do, he said. He added that this promise was not only for the residents of constituency 8 but for all the elderly on the island. For the lawyer, if this promise is considered a bribe, then all the measures proposed by the various parties should be considered as electoral snippets. Especially since the pension increase was also included in the National Alliance’s election manifesto.
Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth and his running mates, Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister Leela Devi Dookun-Luchoomun, and former Trade Minister Yogida Sawmynaden were present at the hearing.
