Dear Editor,
THE recent statement on the recount process by the Organisation of American States (OAS) that, “ A declaration based on these results would lead to the installation of a legitimate government” is that organization’s opinion. However, it is another clear demonstration that the OAS is not an impartial observer of the Guyana election process but is instead an instrument for regime change as was seen in Bolivia. It is Guyanese and their institutions’ opinion which matters, not that of foreign interests.
While foreign observers have the right to express their opinion on the election they are observing, it is expected that it is done in a responsible and non-partisan manner; the OAS’s premature declaration that the process is credible to decide a winner in the elections even before the process is completed. And the Guyana Election Commission (GECOM) not determining how it would deal with numerous cases and evidence of irregularities and anomalies which have been revealed from the examination of the ballot boxes. This is no small matter in the context of Guyana’s electoral history and is critical for the acceptance of the results of the recount.
In the current situation where the country’s unity and cohesion are threatened, the OAS is recklessly invoking the “unhelpful” position that no election is perfect, therefore, the results should be accepted. No foreign interest, political or otherwise, can decide what level of imperfections Guyanese are willing to embrace as acceptable in our elections. This is the solid right of Guyanese and their institutions. It is we who have to live with the decisions and their consequences. It is therefore our right to set election standards that are higher than the so-call “international norm”. This can be a profound contribution to our political culture and governance. In so performing, Guyana can contribute to global enhancement of elections practice and accountability. As an independent nation, we have the right aspiring to higher electoral standards than that of many Western countries including the United States of America.
The children of enslavement, indenture along with our indigenous people, all victims of European exploitation and oppression, must rise to the historical challenges posed by our National and Regional Elections. We have the opportunity to demonstrate to the world that we have a sense of justice and nationhood that is bigger than “winners and losers” when that outcome is based on questionable and tainted elections. I am on record as early as the 1997 elections in contending that our elections are a racial/ethnic census, and that elections have the potential of aggravating political and economic competition to the point of destroying the nation.
In this context, Guyana does not have the luxury to continue playing with fraudulent elections as we have been doing for a considerable time. I have made the point that periodic elections in Guyana, if they are not to be counterproductive, as have been for most of our election history, have to be based on the highest standards. This is something the OAS is not interested in as witnessed by their track record.
We Guyanese must remind ourselves that post-1992 elections ushered in new forms of refined methods of elections rigging by the PPP/C, aimed at ensuring a comfortable parliamentary majority. In these new forms of rigging, the PPP/C had the advantage in terms of numbers that allow them to cover their crimes; since it allows them to win the plurality. The rigging intends to achieve a parliamentary majority large enough to pass a national budget without depending on the support of other parties.
This form of election fraud falls within the so-call international acceptable standards that the OAS has invoked that once the fraud is not enough to change the logic of the vote, the government emergent from those elections is considered legitimate. Our experience on this matter reveals to us the dangers in acceptance of governments coming out of election fraud before 2015. It took 23 years of struggle to defeat the PPP/C. Over those two-plus decades, rigged election occurred unabated with the blessings of international observers and the Western diplomatic community.
I end by reiterating that the decision of whether the March 2, 2020 elections and the recount process is credible enough to form the basis for a “legitimate government” is a matter for the Guyanese people and their institutions — and not foreign interests like the OAS.
Regards
Tacuma Ogunseye
Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_06_08_2020