The gazetting of the Constituencies Commission report has not derailed plans by attorney Michael Scott to push forward with the legal action he filed on behalf of Fort Charlotte MP Dr. Andre Rollins and Montagu MP Richard Lightbourn.
Scott said he intends to take the case as far as the Privy Council if needed.
He had intended to apply for an injunction intended to prevent the gazetting of the report, which he and his clients insist should be void because it was completed outside the five-year timeframe called for by the constitution. He said he was shocked by the action taken, making it clear to him that the government fears the validity of his clients' case.
"I was shocked to see that actually," he said of the gazetting of the report on Friday.
"They're obviously in an unholy rush to get this done as quickly as possible, as if they are petrified that my clients may be on to a good case."
Scott and his clients, Rollins and Lightbourn, are seeking a judicial review into the constitutionality and legality of the report.
Scott and attorneys from the Office of the Attorney General presented skeleton arguments before Justice Ian Winder last Thursday.
Article 70 of the constitution states that the commission shall report at five-year intervals.
Based on that, the new boundaries report should have been produced by November 16, 2016, five years after the last report.
Asked whether the gazetting has changed his plans, Scott said, "Not at all because our case was commenced before the debate actually began in Parliament, and we intend to actually proceed on Tuesday.
"I believe that our application for leave will succeed, [and] in the event that it doesn't, we are prepared to take it to the Court of Appeal and then to the Privy Council because we believe our argument on the law is a solid one."
Attorney Loren Klein, representing the government in the matter, argued in court on Thursday that even if the court contends that the boundaries report was not filed on time, it would not make it invalid.
Klein contended that "the simple failure to comply with a procedural requirement, not a substantive requirement, does not necessarily invalidate an executive action taken, appointment made or legal result attained".
But Scott insisted there is no legitimacy in "procedural slackness".
"You have to look at it in this perspective; Mr. Klein's arguments are that the article in the constitution is merely directory," he said.
"If he's right [and] you don't comply, what is the sanction for that? Does it mean that you can simply ignore the provision in the constitution?"
The opposition MPs want the boundaries used in the 2012 general election to be used in the upcoming election.
They also submit the government is practicing gerrymandering, particularly in the Montagu constituency which has been renamed Free Town.
Much of what was historically in the Montagu constituency is now in St. Anne's.
"Then, of course, there are the collateral issues of gerrymandering of boundaries and the issue of whether or not having regard to low voter registration it was proper to have added the 39th constituency," he said.
Scott said the action is more than just politics; it is about solidifying democracy for the Bahamian people.
"If our legislators can ignore the most sacred and organic law of the country, how do we expect ordinary Bahamians to obey the law?," he asked.
Scott said it has been a difficult process bringing the matter to the courts, but it is a necessary one.
"Having filed the necessary papers since last week we've had one roadblock after another trying to have this matter heard, because it's a very sensitive subject and I understand that," he said on Friday.
"No one really wants to deal with this matter, but it's important; and those of us who are supporting this, we are road warriors for democracy."
Justice Winder is expected to hand down his decision tomorrow on whether there are grounds for a judicial review.

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian