This morning, Leader of the Opposition Tracy Panton held a press conference at her constituency office to address the recent ruling by Justice Tawanda Hondora. The decision, handed down on Wednesday afternoon, declared that Panton’s expulsion from the U.D.P. was unlawful and that the October twentieth, 2024, convention she held was not an official U.D.P. event. Panton stated that she respects Justice Hondora’s decision and believes it sets the stage for the party to chart a new path forward in selecting a new executive team. News Five’s Paul Lopez has more on Panton’s reaction and the implications for the U.D.P.’s future.
On Wednesday, High Court Justice Tawanda Hondora delivered a pivotal ruling in the United Democratic Party’s internal conflict involving Tracy Taegar-Panton, Moses Shyne Barrow, and others. The thirty-seven-page judgment declared Panton’s expulsion from the UDP unlawful and stated that the October twentieth convention she led was not an official UDP National Convention. Today, Panton responded to the ruling, marking a significant moment in the ongoing leadership struggle within the party.
Tracy Taegar-Panton, Leader of the Opposition
“It leaves the party having to make a determination on a way forward, not post October twentieth, post March twelfth and we all know how March twelfth played out. The former party leader of the U.D.P. lost his seat and what the U.D.P. constitution dictates, if you lose your seat you cannot serve in the capacity of leader.”
Justice Tawanda Hondora has ruled that Tracy Taegar-Panton’s expulsion from the UDP breached several articles of the party’s constitution. The judgment highlighted that no evidence was presented to show that the Central Executive Committee investigated. Additionally, Panton was expelled without a hearing, and the decision was made by individuals with apparent grievances against her. However, Justice Hondora stopped short of declaring that Panton is or remains a member of the UDP.
“If it was not valid, I was not expelled, I was not constructively resigned, I am a member of the party, I ran under the U.D.P umbrella, I won under the U.D.P umbrella, I have been appointed as leader of the opposition under U.D.P umbrella. I think you have the answer. It is not for any court to step within a membership organization, a political organization and tell the membership how it ought to conduct it affairs. I think he made that explicitly clear in his judgement.”
In an interesting turn of events, Justice Hondora has ruled against the expulsion of several key party members. Attorney Sheena Pitts announced that the ruling not only affects Panton but also nullifies the expulsions of Beverly Williams, Patrick Faber, and John Saldivar.
Sheena Pitts, Attorney-at-Law
“When the claim was filed, honorable Panton counterclaimed and in her counterclaim other parties were sought to be added in the form of honorable Faber, Mr. Saldivar and Beverly Williams. So the expulsion point in the counterclaim covered all such members and what happened in the case the judge said to save cost we will not add these members but we can address the expulsion point as a preliminary issue and we will deal with in turn, address it for honorable Panton and the ramifications for honorable Panton applies to those person.”
Justice Hondora has declared the October twentieth meeting invalid, stating it did not adhere to the UDP constitution’s guidelines for national conventions. According to Hondora, a legitimate national convention must be organized and held by the Central Executive Committee. However, this meeting was orchestrated by Panton and her supporters. Furthermore, Hondora emphasized that the UDP constitution grants the National Party Council the exclusive authority to set the date for a national convention, which must be chaired by the council’s chairperson. This ruling raises questions about the legitimacy of the decisions made during the controversial meeting.
“We felt compelled. The decision makers of the party was clamoring. The situation was completely untenable and so we took action, we made, and we respect that, procedural missteps. I can assure you that will not happen in the future.”
Pitts has conceded that her appointment as interim chair of the UDP, made on October twentieth, is invalid. This acknowledgment follows Justice Hondora’s ruling, which found the appointment did not comply with the party’s constitutional requirements.
“The appointment for me as interim chair cannot hold, I am not the chair and especially backed up by the judgement, I am not the chair. But we knew that since general election, because those interim appointment only lasted until the general election. The general election was definitive in that it is the great reset.”
Reporting for News Five, I am Paul Lopez
