AG won’t take up election ‘challenge’

| 08/08/2009

(CNS): Attorney General Samuel Bulgin has said that he will not exercise his power to challenge the Grand Court’s decision on the Bodden Town election controversy. According to a report on News 27, Bulgin, who is the only remaining person who can bring a fresh challenge against Mark Seymour and Dwayne Scotland, has said he has nothing to add on the matter. In a short statement to the TV station he said  the Attorney General’s Chambers does not wish to make any further comments beyond what was already stated on the 28 May 2009.

In that written statement he had acknowledged that his office was one of the parties that can take action, but doing so would be contrary to his duty to maintain neutrality in political matters. Bulgin said he had carefully considered the legal issues involved, as well as the public interest implications in the context of what he knows to be his constitutional responsibility.

“These are issues which must be approached with prudence and caution,” he said in the May statement. “After considering not only the allegations but the law and the public interest, I take the view that although the Constitution provides that an application to the Grand Court to have an elected Member disqualified from sitting may be made by the Attorney General, among other described parties, that in the current circumstances this is not an action that I should take.” 

Go to video/article


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Local News

About the Author ()

Comments (24)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    Caymanians hang our heads in shame.

    Caymanians are allowing the violation of our Constitution without punishment.  In other countries people have the guts and fortitude to take to the streets.  Caymanians are now too comfortable to get out in the sun for a while to protect and fight for democracy.

    Caymanians have no doubt your inaction and complacency will ensure that it will get worse before it gets better, and I know that is a long time down the line in another generation.

    Caymanians demand a real Attorney General, not just a politically biased seat warmer.

  2. Anonymous says:


  3. Anonymous says:

    In a way, I really do not blame the AG for not pursuing this challenge. Because after all is said and done it was the people of Bodden Town who voted for Mark and Dwayne. Obviously they entrusted their vote to who they saw fit. And who is to say that after all this time and money is wasted that in the event that a by- election was to occur that they would not vote the same? The Opposition does not seem to care much so why should Mr. Bulgin stress himself? I say, if the Bodden Towner’s are satisfied with a few pebbles thrown out on their driveways and a few extra groceries on their tables why should they complain? Its only four years until next election, when we can look forward to getting more stuff. Who cares about our future and the future of our children anymore? When we can get a new fridge! YAY!!

    • AnonyMouse says:

      To Anonymous @ 14:53

      I too am from BT and I too want Seymour and Scotland in, I am no PPM supporter – but the AG is the island’s chief legal advisor and his job is to uphold the law – and when faced with doing this he declined to take any action.  The point is not the worthiness of Seymour and Scotland to take up their roles.  The point (that many seem to keep missing) is – in doing nothing about the apparent disqualification, there was a breach of the constitution.  In doing nothing the second time around, its like sticking the proverbial two fingers up at the constitution and the rule of law – nothing to do with the candidates themselves – its to do with upholding the law.

      Laws were not made to be broken, but it seems that the AG, government departments, the police, and even now the general public of this island feel free to do so.

      No wonder Cayman seems to be deteriorating into a lawless and crime-ridden place.  If those that are here to set an example don’t bother doing so by upholding the law, then why expect the public to?


  4. Anon says:

    Is there any wonder that this country is turning into such a lawless place when our lawmakers and law enforcers have so blatantly disrespect and disregard the law?  The AG was the first one who should have addressed this (without burying his head in the sand and hoping someone else would).  Now, faced with yet another opportunity to redress the situation he just buries his head even further into the sand.

    Nice example to set AG, very nice indeed.  Poor Cayman.

  5. 5th Generation Young Caymanian says:


    The good conscience of people is disappearing faster and faster – and without exercising the "right" and "wrong" mentality, persons have let morals and sound thinking wither away. 

    One day I hope that someone, some people, will not be afraid, ashamed, incompetent and intimidated to do the right thing, regardless of political groups or social class. 

    Thank you Mr. Solomon and others, you didn’t do this because of any political side, as many think and thought; you did it because it was the right thing to do.

    One day I hope all our Caymanian children and grandchildren and greatgrand children will have the morals and right thinking to make good decisions, ones that may hurt to do, may be scary to do but will make them stand proud, the way our forefathers/mothers stood.  

    No man is perfect, but trying everyday to be something better, is admirable – or Government, TRY to be something better, please.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Response to "Political nuetrality ??? at 16:12 

    A fine idea. Now, why don’t you sit down and draft the petition so that eeryone who likes your idea will have something to sign or are you just going to complain and wait for someone else to take on the responsibility?

  7. Anonymous says:

    HON. SAMUEL BULGIN the Attorney General for the Cayman Islands.  Please don’t address him as Hon. again he don’t deserve being called that anymore.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Political neutrality???? In Jamaica the principal political parties each had their own armed militias who broke laws at will and claimed immunity from prosecution on the basis that their actions were political. Is that what Cayman is headed for?  

    No one in authority in Cayman is going to do anything about this farce. Maybe if we start an online petition to the UK government some one will take notice. Here is the URL:


  9. Anonymous says:

    The persons in this forum declaring Messrs Scotland and Seymour “broke the constitution” (which isn’t even proper English) are the same people who said that Ms. Catron et al’s challenge using a summons (instead of the standard elections petition) was a ‘slam dunk’. They didn’t know what they were talking about then and certainly don’t know now. If anyone should be ashamed and forced leave these islands, it should be these so-called experts, Caymanian or otherwise.

    Who failed this island? If anyone did certainly it must be the PPM, who lost two seats in Bodden Town and had more reason than anyone to challenge the election in a timely manner? Note, the very same PPM who lauded Mr. Bulgin’s appointment and performance numerous times, in both the opposition and government benches they sat. They and their supporters continue push all responsibilityfor an essentially political decision on to a non-political civil servant—precisely what they did to Ken Jefferson. I’m sure that the next scandal will find Mr. McCarthy culpable. 

    The role of the Attorney General is not that of a prosecutor, contrary to commonly held opinion. But even if it was, every prosecutor has to make a decision about whether or not to push a case through the courts. When he makes that decision he has to consider the likeliness that he’ll win, the cost in time and money, and over how beneficial it will be to the community. The AG has made a judgment, which the law allows him to do (notice it states “shall” not “will”). Mr. Bulgin has no obligation to enforce the constitution according to what people wished it said, but rather according to his best legal judgment. When all the dust settles it would be great to get a group of Attorneys together to discuss the whole episode—and, just as with Mr. Solomon’s and Ms. Catron’s case, you will find that the disqualification of Scotland and Seymour is far from a ‘slam dunk’.  And then you will see how difficult a decision it really must have been for the Hon. Mr. Bulgin.

  10. Anonymous says:


    Challenge was found lacking: This could not be further from the truth. Smellie did not consider any of the arguments except that it should have been filed under the Elections law and NOT the constitution – how sad is that? None of the substantive issues were discussed. It’s really funny that Joke Joke said "two wrongs don’t make a right" – finally admitting that they were wrong. But cleary there’s no consequence for his wrong.

    Sad day in Cayman!!!  The AG’s decision to do nothing is a decision in support of the UDP! Sam Bulgin should be removed from Office.

    What happens if next week it becomes unpopular or politically hot to prosecute someone for murder? Then what Sam?

  11. Anonymous says:

    This is the beginning of the end !!!!  Where the hell is Kurt Tibbetts and the PPM. Is there a third party out there ????

  12. Anonymous says:

    Sam Bu. has taken a political stance – he has chosen to support Mac and the UDP under whose Government he was appointed in the first place.  We MUST ALL understand that George Mc. Sam Bu. and Ken J. are all UDP appointments and supporters of that party.  I could’nt care less about PPM but I care immensely about our Constitution.  Man, look at what happened in Honduras (a country that some Caymanians consider to be "backwards") – their Supreme Court upheld their Constitution and removed their President who was trying to go against their Constitution – Cayman we have a long way to go.  Well done Sammy B FOR MAINTAINING YOUR POLITICAL BIAS!!  Political nuetrality my …

  13. Caymanian to the bone!!! says:

    The AG didn’t need Mac’s status grants he married one of us.

    Anyway, he should be removed from this throne because obvioulsy he cannot handle the matter or he is incompetent to deal with the matter and simply put, will not touch it because he can’t do it. 

    Also, he is being fed the NO’s from the UDP leaders and whom do you think he is going to take sides with the UDP leader or the rest of the country? 

    I am publicly calling for the Hon. Samuel Bulgin to remove himself for thie position he is in because the people of the Cayman Islands (the Caymanian people – not the massess of Caymanian status holders who claim they are Caymanian only when it is convenient to be one), but the born and bred one’s as WE HAVE NO CONFIDENCE IN YOU The Attorney General of the Cayman Islands,  Remove yourself now!!!


    ATTN: Governor Stuard Jack, REMOVE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FROM HIS POSITION NOW!!!  This man no longer has the confidence of the CAYMANIAN POPULUS to fill this position and we know that you are his boss and you can remove him.  IF YOU GOVENOR JACK want to leave this country with a good taste in our mouths, remove THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAMUEL BULGIN and appoint an ATTORNEY GENERAL of CAYMANIAN BLOOD, to do the job.

    NO CONFIDENCE IN HON. SAMUEL BULGIN the Attorney General for the Cayman Islands.  TAKE HIM OUT OF OFFICE NOW!!!!!!!!

  14. Wake up! says:

    Wake up people, the challenge has been made and was found lacking. The AG knows that it would be a losing battle. The challengers should not have taken a que from the very people they are opposing and filed their challange LATE!

    Why not expend that energy now on something that can actually benefit the country…there is a need for Health Care Reform in this country, Economic Simulation, Youth and Violence, Gun Control, and Crime… a host of more important things to concentrate on.

    This is sounding more and more like sour grapes…really!! Get on with it! I understand the consitution law was breached, that breached was challenged and found lacking. Get your acts together next time!

    For now, lets move on and deal with more serious issues in the country chalk this up to a learning experience for everyone, your places are secure in the history books. That fifteen minutes of fame allocated to this has been stretched to its limit.

    Lets not hate on each other, and carry ill will over something like this… we need to band together for the good of our country and do our part to keep us afloat and ahead of those international forces that would love to see us fall and fail.

    Lets not follow the old clannish ways and find ourselves so busy fighting amongst ourselves that we destroy ourselves while the enemy watches with glee and satisfaction.

    Wake up, lets get on with it! I love my country and all its people…born and bred, those who came by plane, boats or pain…I love you all, so lets make a difference and not make this issue continue to distract us from the declining morals and state of our country.


  15. Anonymous says:

    What a precedent to set!! Goodbye Cayman!

  16. Caymaniam says:

    "he acknowledged that his office was one of the parties that can take action, but doing so would be contrary to his duty to maintain neutrality in political matters" 

    How can allowing one political party to break the constitution and go unchallenged be considered "neutrality"?

    Would the AG care to point out the particular paragraph of his "duty" that requires "neutrality in political matters" that takes precedent over upholding the constitution?



    • UDP kiss up says:

      Exactly – the AG’s job is to ensure that the laws of the land are upheld and to serve the Cayman Islands with honesty and integrity. How is being neutral justified when you’re allowing one party to remain as if nothing has happened?

      Oh how the pay check can make you shed a blind eye…I hope the Lord comes soon because I sure as HELL don’t want to raise children up in this jungle of sinners.

  17. Caymaniam says:

    "the Constitution provides that an application to the Grand Court to have an elected Member disqualified from sitting may be made by the Attorney General"

    The constitution clearly disqualifies the candidates in question. 

    There is no rational rebuttal on this point.

    It follows that our Attorney General, by his inaction, is effectively sanctioning a breach of the constitution.

    Argument done!

  18. Anonymous says:

    What a perfect title to this story.

  19. Anonymous says:

    Perhaps I misunderstand the role of the AG in the legal system but isn’t the AG the country’s senior legal agent for the enforcement of the country’s laws? Wasn’t a law breached and doesn’t the AG respond to this breach?

  20. Anonymous says:

    Surprise surprise. The AG owes his allegance to Mac for making him a Caymanian via the 2003 "Caymanian Status" grants.

    This is a very dangerous position for this country to be in. Who is going to ensure compliance with our constitution when the Chief Legal Advisor and Guardian of our constitution has failed to do so because of political affiliations and the Governor sits idly by on the Seven Mile Beach advising his UK masters that their "plan" is working very well.

    Wake up Cayman… is time for us to take to the streets and request the removal of this AG for his failure to uphold our constitution.

    His excuse that for him to challenge this would affect his ability to remain politically neutral is, quite frankly, an insult to our intelligence. That’s like saying that if Mac tried to take control of the police and the judiciary that theAG could not take any action out of fear that he might be seen to be political !!!

    Do your job Mr. AG. If you won’t then the country must find an AG that will !!!

    • Anonymous says:

      Mr. Bulgin is married to a Caymanian and has been for quite some time. He would therefore be entitled to apply for and receive Caymanian status through his spouse. So if Mac gave him status in the "rush" like others who cares he would have got it any how. And what is so wrong with Mr. Bulgin that he should not have been granted status.

      • Anonymous says:

        Nothing wrong with Sam getting status (although he could have waited a couple of years nuh?) – but I do have a problem with him then being asked to opine on the legality of it after it was given to him and others- and him then saying the grants to everyone were lawful. Classic professional conflict. It seems plainly that many of the grants may not have been lawful. Don’t take my word for it. That is the view of David Pannick QC, the same leading constitutional lawyer the Government hired to defend the election petition!