0

COURT ORDER FOR FNM LEADERS: Party vice-chairman granted injunction on Pintard and Sands

Free National Movement leader Michael Pintard and party chairman Dr Duane Sands.

Free National Movement leader Michael Pintard and party chairman Dr Duane Sands.

By LEANDRA ROLLE

Tribune Staff Reporter

lrolle@tribunemedia.net

THE Supreme Court has granted an injunction against Free National Movement leader Michael Pintard and party chairman Dr Duane Sands after legal action was filed last year by FNM vice chairman Richard Johnson who was suspended from attending FNM council meetings.

The March 5 ruling states Mr Pintard and Dr Sands are “hereby restrained” from prohibiting and interfering with Mr Johnson as he carries out his duties as FNM vice chairman.

The ruling further notes this includes, but is not limited to, his attendance and participation in all Executive Committee and Central Council meetings organised by the FNM.

In November, Mr Johnson sued Mr Pintard and Dr Sands after he was banned from attending council meetings, which he claimed violated the party’s constitution.

He is also seeking some $500,000 in compensation for general or exemplary damages concerning the suspension which stems from allegations that he “acted contrary to the interests of the party, its platform, policies,” etc.

The writ of summons was filed on November 28, 2022, by Mr Johnson and on March 5, he further filed an ex parte summons with notice to the defendants supported by an affidavit.

 But, according to court documents, neither defendant showed up to court.

 The Supreme Court ordered that Mr Pintard and Dr Sands were barred “from restraining, prohibiting or otherwise interfering with the plaintiff in the discharge of his functions as a duly elected vice chairman of the Free National Movement under the provisions of the constitution thereof, inclusive of, but not limited to the plaintiff’s attendance at, and participation in all meetings of the Executive Committee and the Central Council of the Free National Movement pending the determination of the plaintiff’s claim herein or further order of this court.”

 The ruling also granted an injunction against members of the FNM’s Executive Committee and Central Council who voted or participated in meetings concerning Mr Johnson’s suspension, restraining them from participating in any tribunal convened under the party’s constitution to hear the statement of charges made against the vice chairman.

 According to the ruling, this includes Bryan Brown, Jaunianne Dorsett and Clement Penn, Sr.

 It adds that they “are hereby restrained from participation in any tribunal convened or to be convened within the meaning of Article 54 of the constitution of the Free National Movement to hear and determine the statement of charge against the plaintiff dated 17th November 2022, or any appeal therefrom to the Central Committee of the Free National Movement, by reason of their actual and/or apparent bias in relation to, and/or prejudgment of, the allegations against the plaintiff pending the determination of the plaintiff’s claim herein or further order of this court.”

 The ruling further notes that costs are “reserved pending the determination of the action”.

 This latest court action comes as the party is already facing the perception of being fractured internally and suffering from infighting.

 According to party insiders, there appears to be a rift between those who support former FNM leader Dr Hubert Minnis and Mr Pintard, the party’s current leader.

Comments

ExposedU2C 1 year, 8 months ago

This is a most shameful example of the politicization of our courts. The are now outrightly interfering in party politics, in this case doing the political bidding of both cruel and role-poly Davis and the ruthlessly evil Minnis. Utterly disgraceful ruling by the courts to say the least.

Observer 1 year, 8 months ago

Hey bey, your party rules must comply with the laws of this country. The supreme court is the main abiter here. Get with it.

Flyingfish 1 year, 8 months ago

As long as the FNM is paying the damages I don't object if they truly broke the law. I just find it bit weird that the supreme court has the matter.

birdiestrachan 1 year, 8 months ago

Pintard can just go ahead and blame the PLP it is the PLP fault

birdiestrachan 1 year, 8 months ago

Appears to be a rift, in the FNM ?. They are declaring WAR

TalRussell 1 year, 8 months ago

Ah, who else but Comrade Thee Mr. Minnis, would just 'pop up like popcorn' at the 'Hemorrhaging from Infighting' --- Red Party's constituency meetings. --- Bless him, --- Yes?

Commenting has been disabled for this item.