Election petition challenges Randy Baltimore’s St. Philip North by-election win
A High Court election petition has been filed challenging the validity of Randy Baltimore’s victory in the March 16 by-election for St. Philip North, with the claimant alleging that Baltimore was not legally qualified to contest the seat because he remained a public officer at the time of nomination.
The petition, filed on March 20 by George Wehner, an elector in the constituency, argues that Baltimore — who was declared elected with 924 votes to Alex Browne’s 407 — was still serving as a Principal Customs Officer on Nomination Day, Feb. 25, and was therefore disqualified from being elected to the House of Representatives under Section 39(1)(g) of the Constitution and Section 10 of the Civil Service Act.
According to the court filing, Baltimore had purportedly sought to resign from the public service shortly before Nomination Day. However, the petitioner contends that no valid resignation was effected in keeping with the procedures governing the civil service.
The petition cites correspondence from the Public Service Commission dated March 19, 2026, which allegedly stated that Baltimore submitted a resignation letter said to take effect on Feb. 20, 2026. But the Commission reportedly found that resignation to be defective because Civil Service Regulation No. 28(1) requires at least three months’ notice of an intention to resign.
The same correspondence, according to the filing, said Baltimore’s employment was instead terminated on March 9, 2026.
Wehner argues that because Baltimore was allegedly still a public officer on Nomination Day, he was not qualified to be nominated as a candidate, his name was unlawfully included on the ballot, and he was incapable of being validly elected.
The petition further claims that Baltimore’s participation as a disqualified candidate materially affected the outcome of the election and rendered the declared result unlawful.
In the relief sought, the petitioner is asking the court to declare that Baltimore was ineligible to be elected and that his return is void in its entirety. The filing also seeks a declaration that every vote cast for Baltimore be treated as a “thrown away vote” and asks the court to declare that the candidate with the greater valid votes should be awarded the seat.
Additionally, the petition requests interlocutory orders to restrain Baltimore from taking the oath of office pending the determination of the matter.
A separate notice of application filed the same day also asks the court to subpoena Chief Establishment Officer Francia Sheppard to give sworn evidence and produce records relating to whether Baltimore submitted a resignation from the public service, whether any such resignation was received and processed, whether it was submitted to or approved by the Public Service Commission, and what his status was within the public service at all material times, including Nomination Day and Election Day.
The application states that Sheppard, as Chief Establishment Officer, is the custodian of the relevant records and is uniquely positioned to provide direct evidence on whether any resignation was properly received, processed and approved.
The matter is expected to turn on whether Baltimore lawfully ceased to be a public officer before he was nominated to contest the St. Philip North by-election.
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
Whether or not what is stated is correct this will not be overturned. This is Antigua. UPP needs to wake from their slumber. This is a constituency that Labour held for 50 plus years so the win was not a surprise, the way UPP lost was the surprise
Like a mischievous child, shit stirrer Wehner is up to his old tricks again.🤡
You’re wasting your time Georgie boy but you are inadvertently motivating some UPP voters like me to say enough of supporting this circus of an opposition and to look carefully at Massiah’s DNA.
Sorry George, you are wrong on this one. Yes, the loss was a devastating one, but the voting process was a fair and transparent one, accounted for by the ABEC team.
I think our energies should be focused on being a better opposition with leaders that want the best for the country and its citizens instead of these infernal and internal factions.
Gaston soon call an Election. You don’t think he realises we are wounded?
UPP must be ready…
Beat them at their game. I really hope that his victory is ‘short-lived ‘. Cheats they are.
The upp is so desperate, even a technicality will do
BRIXTONIAN my Friend you have moved up on my chart. This is the first time that you realize the UPP is severely wounded. I hope you will give the UPP proper advice. Thank you for showing the Human side of you and not spewing RHETORIC.
Leave St Phillips North alone not even Jesus Christ with pastor Jackson as his campaign manager can beat labour in that constituency. The people up there put party before God, where in the world can a political party hijacked a church to celebrate 50 years of Sir Robin singing ” The people flag is deepest red” ….turning the temple of God into another ” People’s Place”.
COME JESUS COME….SAVE ANTIGUA AND BARBIDA
I have stated it before and I am stating it again, this petition cannot succeed. Yes the Civil Service Regulations require 30 days notice for resignation. However, that is just an administrative requirement. If you do not meet it it does not mean your resignation is not effective. All it means is that you will lose some of your acquired benefits. The Constitution clearly states that a Public Servant must resign from the Public Service in order to run for politics. Once you have resigned before Nomination Day your nomination is valid. Anyway, the court is there to determine the law so I have no problem with the petition proceeding. Similarly, I am disappointed that the Anthony Smith “INDEPENDENT” status claim did not proceed so that the court could state exactly what does INDEPENDENT as used in the Constitution means. I am also of the view that the Anthony Smith challenge would not have succeeded.
Mr. Tabor, You are correct. Wehner is a loose cannon. This Guy is the most IGNORANT Person on earth. I would never like to have Wehner on my ticket. Why Bowen would represent Wehner with His STUPIDNESS.
WEHNER shame on you.
No matter the result, if what is being expressed here is true or reasonably believed is true, it is a valid complaint filed to encourage compliance with the law. It also can be beneficial to show incompetence of the ABLP and even their dishonesty.
However, public policy tend to focus on the people’s choice and the fact UPP or Mr. Wehner waited this long (if he had this knowledge previously) may be detrimental for their case, even if they prove the allegations here.
UPP and Mr. Wehner, will have to deal with the ABLP defense of laches, the equitable defense, based on fairness that bars a claim if the plaintiff has unreasonably delayed bringing the lawsuit, causing disadvantage or “prejudice” to the defendant and in this case, an entire electorate.
The plaintiff are equitably estopped from adopting a new position that contradicts their previous actions or statements when that change causes unfair loss to another, this would be a gross loss to the public of a constitutional right to democracy, picking their representation, and this is highly important, it is a fundamental right in comparison to the mere violation of still being a public servant.
Either side may contact me for additional arguments on their side. I love strategizing and law. Yours sincerely, law nerd.
in all saints east and st. luke.
@My Way Of Helping the by-election was on the 16 March, 2026 and the Petition was filed 20 March, 2026 so it is not LATE and the issue of Laches does not apply since you have 7 days in which to bring an election petition. However, you need to look at my argument and understand it. Mr. Baltimore not giving the Establishment Division the required 30 days notice to resign does not invalidate the resignation. Now, once you are not a Public Servant on the day of Nomination your nomination cannot be challenged on that basis. This Petition is really nugatory and will not succeed. The 30 days requirement in the Civil Service Regulations is simply an administrative issue. Failure to follow that administrative requirement will only affect your benefits. The Establishment Division cannot say you did not satisfy the 30 days notice requirement so we are not accepting your resignation. An employer cannot force an employee to work against his wish.
@Charles Tabor, the arguments you are making are arguments that should be made. But I do think because this is a fundamental right, the gigantic loss of the UPP in that election, etcetera, it would be in the interest of justice and equity to let the result stand. This doesn’t mean I want UPP to drop the case but use it for other benefits like proving hypocrisy of the ABLP suing in the MP. Simon matter in Bolans pertaining to similar facts. So, you may not win this case but you may win some public sentiment and voters for UPP. Again, strategizing does not always include going after what you will win but sometimes going after what you can show how incompetent, deceptive, unfair and hypocritical your competition may be.
The only correction to your response to me (thanks for responding and having an intellectual debate) that I will make is that laches applies even when filing within any timely filing date. It focuses on the unreasonable delay to the detriment of the respondent and not on a predetermined or statutory filing time. Laches elements are unreasonable delay causing prejudice/harm to respondent. While the statute of limitations is a rigid deadline, laches is an equitable defense against unreasonable delay that causes substantial prejudice or harms (e.g., lost evidence, changed circumstances) to the defendant, despite being within the technical time limit.
Courts use laches to ensure fairness, the court have discretion to dismiss a case if the petitioner “slumbered on their rights,” even if the statutory period has not expired. It is highly fact-dependent rather than based on a set number of days.
@My Way Of Helping your last paragraph nicely escapulates the issue and at the same time resolves it as well. In this case the Petitioner Mr. Wehner did not “slumber on his rights”. The issue of dismissing the Petition could therefore arise on that basis. Also, in this matter the issue of harm/prejudice to the Respondent does not arise. My contention is that the Petition would not succeed because the resignation of the Respondent from the Public Service was effected before Nomination day. However, I am in agreement with you that the court should be utilized in many instances to provide clarity to various aspects of the law. This is one such case as is the meaning of INDEPENDENT in our Constitution re the Anthony Smith resignation from the UPP in Parliament. I was looking forward to the court adjudicating that matter but it was not continued by the Claimant.
*The issue of dismissing the Petition could therefore not arise on that basis. (Just a correction)
Comments are closed.