Dear Editor,
IT is without doubt that any process where there is a continuous change in standards will forever produce nothing but confusion. In my humble opinion this is exactly what is playing out in our elections. The sad reality that I’ve come to accept, is that the moving goalpost is not down to the natives, rather, it is because of external forces. And this inordinate and externally driven process has brought to the fore the true patriots — the “patriotic” Guyanese. The very characters who once excluded me from making any political comments since I failed the minimum criteria of paying taxes in Guyana. For them, being born in Guyana was not good enough. Being Guyanese was not good enough. One must be a payer of taxes. So it was with great shock and awe when I heard these very voices now demanding that external, non-taxpaying forces with no links to Guyana, intervene in our electoral process. And all that was required to make them shed their veneer of patriotism was the lubricating power of oil.
And one of these external forces alluded to is the CCJ. Many would recall the jurisdiction/ no jurisdiction case that was laid to rest by our Appeal Court. The fact is that most legal scholars argued that the CCJ’s jurisdiction is as good as a Jagdeo third term. But that was not to be as the CCJ armed themselves with political shovels, dug up the Appeal Court ruling and in the process gave themselves jurisdiction. And like that, the dead has resurfaced, causing many of us nightmares with the notable exception of those who have an affinity for the electoral dead. So with the dead on their judicial table, they provided a conflicting entanglement of a ruling. One of their legal entanglements that was and still is at variance with common sense is their definition of valid votes, as votes which ex facie appear valid. And that was it. Clearly out of political expediency, legal myopia or a combination of both, they ignored the fact that we are no longer on the surface. The moment we dug six feet deep into those ballot boxes we have entered the belly of fraud which cannot be ignored. As a result, in my humble opinion the CCJ should have taken that into account and define valid votes not simply as votes which appear valid on the surface, but rather votes which on the surface appear valid minus the fraudulent votes. The fact is that we have all seen the fraudulent votes. The death certificates. The immigration records. The missing documents. I must be missing something; hopefully not my two cerebral hemispheres. Why can’t they see it?
Then it got more bizarre. GECOM too armed themselves with powers via Order 60 to address anomalies that occurred during the recount process. In effect, Order 60 was the legal sledgehammer that broke the seals of the ballot boxes. So on entering the ballot boxes, GECOM discovered more anomalies than that of children born in Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the nuclear bomb. Most right-thinking Guyanese thought that if Order 60 was used to address anomalies from the count, then surely it should be used to address the anomalies from the recount. The GECOM Chairperson, retired Justice Singh had other ideas. She concluded that GECOM has discovered enough anomalies for this election cycle. And with that Order 60 was placed to rest and the anomalies transferred to an election petition court. This clearly made no sense to most of us. Without doubt, we have seen the fraud in the recount and the constitution does not permit declaration of fraudulent votes. Or it may be that only APNU+AFC has seen the fraud, since everyone else has retinitis pigmentosa, rendering them blind.
So after the CCJ ruling they released a statement to reaffirm their independence and the fact that they remain unaffected by political or external forces. Seriously CCJ? Have you ever heard a court anywhere in the world having to make such a statement? Why is the statement being made a few weeks after their recent legal gymnastics? Why is it a few weeks after their President Justice Adrian Saunders has petitioned other CARICOM countries to make the CCJ their apex court? In my opinion this is not coincidental. The mere fact that a court has to state what is considered to be a given would make me concerned. An analogy is you entering the operating room and the first thing the surgeon says is that he would not kill you.
Regards
Dr. Mark Devonish
Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_25_07_2020