GERRYMANDERING: UNC MAY HAVE A CASE

THE United National Congress (UNC) may be on solid ground in its plans to challenge the new Tobago electoral constituencies. 

Courts in Britain, the United States, and other countries have heard litigation of unfair bias in the establishment of electoral boundaries. 

But winning such cases could be tough since litigants have to make a foolproof case that the constituencies were deliberately designed to favour one political organisation, and there was ill-intent in the decision. 

Courts in Britain have heard various petitions over the years, but they have demanded extensive evidence of deliberate unfairness in the creation of the constituencies.
The Privy Council has delivered assorted rulings, including one in February 2015 on new boundaries in St. Kitts-Nevis. 

The US Supreme Court in 2019 turned down an application, essentially ruling that claims of gerrymandering are none of the jurists’ business. 

But Chief Justice John Roberts said that excessive partisanship in the drawing of districts lead to results that “reasonably seem unjust…” 

In 2017, the Court had entertained such a case with respect to the re-drawing of two congressional districts in the North Carolina General Assembly. 

State courts have heard similar cases. 

If the UNC challenges the new Tobago seats, it would have to prove purposeful and planned bias by the Elections and Boundaries Commission. 

The opposition party claims that three new Tobago House of Assembly constituencies were created in PNM strongholds. 

The new seats were added in order to break the current 6-6 electoral deadlock.