A month has passed since the leadership of the People’s National Party (PNP) held a press conference at which it made allegations of serious irregularities in the general elections of September 3. No evidence to substantiate these allegations was presented.

In fairness, PNP President Mark Golding stated at that time “We are going into the field to do a survey so we can get more tangible information rather than the indirect reports we have been receiving through social media and the campaign structures we have. At that point we can decide where we go from there”.

Given the seriousness of the allegations and the doubts that have been placed on our enviable reputation for conducting free and fair elections, sufficient time has elapsed for the survey to have been carried out but the public has not heard a word as to its findings or what decision has been made as to “where we go from there”.

The only action of which the public is aware which affects only one of the 63 constituencies is a request made to the Constituted Authority by Mr Paul Buchanan, the PNP candidate in West Central St Andrew, for it to file a petition with the Election Court to void the results of the election in that constituency, which happens to be represented by the prime minister.

The Constituted Authority denied the request on the grounds that the evidence submitted, in its view, did not justify the filing of an election petition. Mr Buchanan has subsequently sought judicial review of that decision.

Mr Buchanan’s efforts are puzzling. He did not need the auspices or imprimatur of the Constituted Authority for an election petition to be filed. Under Section 3 of the Election Petitions Act, any person (not even having to be a candidate) can file an election petition. Such a petition would have to be filed within 21 days of the official return made by the returning officer. The law clearly envisaged that the evidence of wrongdoing to support such a petition would be assembled and presented within 21 days. That window has long closed.

This rather circuitous route chosen by Mr Buchanan falls under Section 37 of the Election Petitions Act which empowers the Constituted Authority, at its own instance and in its own discretion, to file an election petition. This provision was inserted in 2003 to enable the Constituted Authority to pursue an election petition if it is in possession of facts on the basis of which it feels the results of an election should be overturned. Indeed, there is no provision in either the Representation of the People Act or Election Petitions Act for requests to be made to the Constituted Authority to file an election petition although such requests would not necessarily be ultra vires.

The judicial review sought by Mr Buchanan may well be useless, since under Section 38 of the Election Petitions Act, a petition by the Constituted Authority must be filed within 28 days of the taking of the poll and the Election Court can extend that period by no more than three days. Both those deadlines have now passed.

In a recent article I pointed out that for the first time in more than 30 years one of our two major political parties, both of which have representatives on the Electoral Commission, has cast doubt on the integrity of our elections. I argued that it should not be taken lightly. Time alone or subsequent silence will not remove it. But it needs to be removed. We have come too far to allow one of our significant achievements as a nation to be so effortlessly discredited. As I asserted previously, shutting up without putting up is not enough. Time come.

Bruce Golding served as Jamaica’s eighth prime minister from September 2007 to October 2011.