Roseau, Dominica. August 4th, 2026 – Former Leader of the Opposition Lennox Linton has secured a historic and landmark constitutional victory against the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Dominica. He defeated the Attorney General’s attempt to defend the President’s erroneous interpretation of the Constitution and shut down his important public-interest claim to determine whether the President acted illegally in failing to appoint an Opposition Leader.
Justice Zainab Jawara-Alami declared that the President acted unconstitutionally when, for 18 months, she refused to recognize and take into account the support of the four Opposition Senators in determining who should be appointed Leader of the Opposition following the resignation of Hon. Jesma Paul-Victor on 20 June 2024.
Mr. Linton was represented by a high-powered legal team from the prestigious Trinidad-based Freedom Law Chambers, including team leader Anand Ramlogan SC, Jared Jagroo and Vishaal Siewsaran, instructed by local Attorney Ronald Charles. The AG was represented by Anthony Astaphan SC, Jason Lawrence, Tameka Burton and Levi Peter
The Court’s order was unequivocal:
“The failure of The President to recognize and/or take into account the support of the four Senators in determining who should be appointed Leader of the Opposition following the resignation of Ms. Jesma Paul-Victor was unconstitutional.”
The President’s interpretation was wrong
The Attorney General argued that “unelected Senators are not empowered to canvass the President nor otherwise participate in the appointment of the Leader of the Opposition, nor is the President on the occasion of the appointment of the Leader of the Opposition, required to take into account any views of unelected Senators”.
The A-G contended that appointed Senators had no constitutional role in canvassing or otherwise influencing the President’s selection of the Leader of the Opposition and that the President was not required to consider their views. The High Court decisively rejected that narrow interpretation.
Justice Jawara-Alami held that the Constitution recognizes both elected Representatives and appointed Senators as members of the House. Upon appointment, Senators become full members and are entitled to exercise the constitutional rights, privileges and functions of that office, except where the Constitution expressly provides otherwise. Accordingly, the phrase “members of the House” in section 66(2) could not lawfully be restricted to elected Representatives alone.
The support of the four Opposition Senators was therefore constitutionally relevant and ought to have been considered by the President. The Court further held that, once an elected member satisfied either of the conditions prescribed by section 66(2), the President was under a mandatory—not discretionary—duty to appoint a Leader of the Opposition.
A constitutional defeat for the Government and Attorney General
The decision is a serious rebuke to the Government and its chief legal advisor, who stoutly defended the President’s interpretation and urged the Court to uphold her position.
The Attorney General argued that “the views of unelected Senators are constitutionally irrelevant”; that the President’s judgment should not be reviewed unless it was irrational or perverse; and that the President was entitled, and even obliged, to decline to appoint a Leader of the Opposition.
Every plank of that constitutional defence was rejected.
Attempt to pre-empt the Court failed
After the proceedings were commenced, Ms. Paul-Victor was eventually appointed Leader of the Opposition in January 2026. The Attorney General then relied upon that belated appointment in an unsuccessful attempt to have Mr. Linton’s constitutional claim struck out because it had become moot, academic and an abuse of the Court’s process.
The High Court rejected that application. Although the vacancy had subsequently been filled, the proper interpretation and operation of the relevant constitutional provision remained unsettled. The Court considered the issue too important to the public interest and Dominica’s constitutional democracy to be left unresolved.
Justice Jawara-Alami emphasized that the office of Leader of the Opposition is an indispensable part of Dominica’s constitutional and democratic structure, with a vital role in securing governmental accountability. It would therefore be contrary to the public interest to permit uncertainty to continue regarding the circumstances in which that important office must be filled.
Because the same constitutional issue could arise again, the Court found that Mr. Linton had established exceptional circumstances warranting a definitive ruling, notwithstanding Ms. Paul-Victor’s subsequent appointment.
The Court emphasized the constitutional importance of the office: “The office of leader of the opposition is an essential part of the constitutional and democratic framework of the country and serves an important role in ensuring accountability within a democracy.”
Court rejects objection to Linton’s standing
The Attorney General also objected to the claim on the ground that Mr. Lennox Linton lacked standing to bring it:
“The claimant has a public record of meddlesome interloping masked under the guise of legitimate concern. In accordance with this modus operandi, the claimant, as a mere busybody, has brought this case seeking to reinsert himself into the fray of parliamentary representation which he and the party of which he is or was a member voluntarily chose to opt out of by boycotting the 2022 general elections. His interest is fanciful, abstract and lacks the proximity and specificity necessary to establish standing…”
That objection was rejected. The Court recognized that the Rules expressly permit a person acting in the public interest to seek constitutional and administrative relief and held that Mr. Linton had sufficient standing to pursue this important claim. This finding reflects Mr. Linton’s longstanding public and political service to Dominica.
A victory for every Dominican
Mr. Linton said: “This victory belongs to every Dominican who believes that public power must be exercised lawfully; that the Opposition has an indispensable role in our democracy; and that the Constitution must remain superior to political convenience, executive preference and partisan maneuvering.
“Today, the Constitution won. Democracy won. Accountability won.”