ON Sunday last we editorialised on the call from several quarters for our political leaders to consider the urgent need for a National Unity Government as one possible way to bring our country together in the wake of the ongoing dispute over the results of the recently concluded elections.

We lent our voice to what we view as a most reasonable proposal, one that has been put on the table as far back as 1961. We observed that the APNU+AFC Coalition, both as a partnership and at the level of its individual member parties, have expressed openness to the idea. In fact, it has been a central plank of the APNU and the Coalition’s platform since the 2011 elections.

It stands to reason, therefore, that if the PPP were to sign on to the idea, we could move closer to some form of National Reconciliation. However, since the publication of that editorial, to the dismay of many, the PPP by way of an official statement and via comments by its leader, has all but closed the door on such a possibility. In effect, the party has made it abundantly clear that it is not interested in a national solution to the current impasse or to the larger divisions that, many have argued, are at the root of the latter. It has also signaled that it is stubbornly wedded to the winner-takes-all approach to governance which, in Guyana’s circumstances, has had negative consequences for sustained national cohesion. It is, of course, no secret that at the bottom of it all is our ethno-political divide which has persisted despite many attempts at containment. The PPP is arguing that the suggestion of a national unity government is an attempt to rob it of the victory which it continues to claim since March 2 despite evidence to the contrary. This stance is being directly and indirectly aided by sections of the international community and their observers who have prematurely signaled a “winner”. In addition, several prominent Guyanese have allowed their names to be used in that regard under the guise of defending democracy. The impact of these pronouncements is the potential empowering of one side of the political divide and isolation of the other side with scant regard for the consequences.

The PPP is obviously taking advantage of this situation and feels emboldened to reject calls for reconciliation and national unity. It is hiding behind that shortsighted and unfounded rhetoric of a rigged election. We humbly suggest that the failure to take a broader and more nuanced attitude to the events since March 2, could have negative consequences for the cohesion of our country. Those who today refuse to grasp the complexity of the situation would have to bear some of the responsibility. Already, it is obvious that they have helped to create an out-of-control PPP which is pursuing a strategy of domination or mayhem. The truth is that the PPP has historically played games with national unity. It is worth recalling that party’s opportunistic attitude to national unity over the years. When Eusi Kwayana proposed Joint Premiership between the leaders of the PPP and PNC in 1961, the PPP flatly rejected it.

However, when, two years later, the party sensed that power was slipping away, thanks to the change from the First-past the Post to Proportional Representation system, it made an about-turn and proposed a power-sharing formulae. A decade and a half later, at the prompting of the Internal Communist Movement, it again proposed a power-sharing arrangement which was rejected by the PNC. Such proposal was again embraced in 1985 as the party reasoned that Guyana needed a common national front against imperialism. However, once the PPP secured power in 1992, its rhetoric and attitude to national unity changed. It contended that the PPP represented national unity and that in any case it needed to build trust with the PNC before agreeing to power sharing. This position has been hardened since Jagdeo took hold of the party following the passing of the Jagans.

Guyanese and the international community must realise that the PPP is simply not interested in a national solution. It is a national tragedy, for it ensures that Guyana remains on the brink of instability. As the country embarks on a path of development thanks to the expected oil and gas wealth, it cannot succeed as a divided nation. We therefore urge all those influential voices which have spoken about the elections to also lift their voices in support of national unity and urge the PPP to come to the table. We make a similar plea to the international community to do the same. The very democracy which they purport to support is being undermined by the PPP’s embrace of one-party domination at the expense of a democracy that is grounded in the multi-ethnic and plural nature of the country.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_27_03_2020

Dear Editor,
The PPP/C knows it inserted fake SOPs into the process at several polling stations across Guyana.  This is why they are trying to prevent GECOM from making a final declaration and the President from swearing-in while simultaneously clamouring for international sanctions and threatening to instigate socio-political instability.  It knows that should the PPP/C file an elections petition after the President is sworn in and, an audit of the elections ordered by the court, this will reveal multiple attempts by the PPP/C to cause layers of electoral fraud the PPP/C tried to engineer.

There is credible evidence that the PPP/C used several tactics to engineer electoral fraud, ranging from manufacturing fraudulent SOPs, voter suppression and vote-buying.  All of this served to undermine the constitutional functions of GECOM, influence public opinion on the credibility of elections and blame the APNU+AFC Coalition for the very fraud the PPP/C tried to engineer.  One just has to review the contract between Mercury Public Affairs and the PPP/C to understand the lengths, at which the PPP/C sought to deny the will of the Guyanese electorate, sabotage the work of GECOM and promote division and social unrest among people of Guyana.

It has now become clear for all Guyanese to see, irrespective of which political party one supports, that the PPP/C along with a handful of small political parties, some with no more that 10-20 members, clandestinely planned to engineer electoral fraud. The first ploy by the PPP/C was to hire Mercury Public Affairs to “lobby” several politicians, political institutions, regional and international organisations like the OAS and the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee.  The second tactic sought to engineer electoral fraud at multiple levels, which I made mention of in the paragraph above. On this point, let me remind persons that in 2015, GECOM unearthed a massive operation that was engineered by the PPP/C to insert fake SoPs in the tabulation process.  The fraudulent SoPs were found while GECOM’s IT Unit tabulated results of the 2015 General and Regional Elections.  The third tactic then was to frustrate GECOM from completing the tabulation of votes for Region Four by requesting GECOM abandon the same tabulation method used to tabulate the nine prior regions.

The PPP/C demanded that GECOM desist from tabulating Region Four votes in a spreadsheet based on the declarations from all 10 electoral districts submitted to GECOM by returning officers. Instead, it wanted GECOM to use SoPs for Region Four, more specifically to arrive at the final vote count for Region Four by comparing the results of all party SoPs with those received by GECOM.  Initially when GECOM stipulated that the same tabulation method will be used for Region Four as it was for all prior regions, the PPP/C along with its proxies, that its, the few third parties colluding with the PPP/C, protested and claimed electoral fraud.  Mind you, the PPP/C, its proxies and the OAS have not provided one bit of evidence although they had cellphones and other recording devices.

After the first round of injunctions and court orders, one of which required GECOM continue or restart the tabulation for Region Four with SoPs presented for said region for all to see, GECOM recommenced its tabulation. After the results showed that the APNU+AFC Coalition received the majority of overall votes and votes for Region Four, the PPP/C again, protested the results and demanded GECOM tabulate the total vote count based the SoPs and collated spreadsheets the PPP/C had and distributed to its proxy small parties.

The fourth tactic, now that the tabulation for each region, Region Four in particular, were undertaken twice, and the APNU+AFC Coalition received the majority of votes on both occasions, the PPP/C now has shifted its demand to a national recount.  In the first instance, a recount using SoPs from GECOM and all political parties was demanded.  Then again the goal post shifted, the PPP/C then demanded a national recount using the ballots cast which are under sealed lock in ballot boxes and heavy-duty containers guarded by the Guyana Police Force.

A fifth tactic that we have seen since the week of March 13, 2020 was to provoke fear among Guyanese by threatening sanctions.  These threats are not related to the conduct of free and fair elections in Guyana, they are a direct result of the international lobbying by Mercury on behalf of the PPP/C.

The sixth tactic employed by the PPP/C is the threat of not recognising the APNU+AFC Government should GECOM declare the results tabulated on the second occasion after the court order instructing GECOM to do same, and the President sworn in on this basis.  The General Secretary of the PPP/C stated further that the PPP/C will swear in Irfaan Ali as President of Guyana, another attempt to engineer instability.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_27_03_2020

– GECOM assures Party agents fearing for safety of ballot boxes

THE Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) on Thursday made it clear that there is no legal requirement for agents of political parties to guard the containers with ballot boxes currently in its custody.

“The Law does not contemplate Party agents as a key stakeholder in the security of ballot boxes, once these have been deposited in the custody of the Commission,” GECOM said Thursday in a statement, while referring to Section 141 of the Representation of the People Act.

According to Section 141 of the Representation of the People Act, “…Any indictment, information or complaint for an offence in relation to ballot boxes, ballot papers and other election material, the property in them may be stated to be in the Chief Election Officer.” **
Opposition-aligned political parties have alleged that GECOM has restricted them from moving around the containers, currently housed at GECOM’s Headquarters on High and Cowan Streets, Kingston, but the Commission is keen to remind that there is no legal basis for agents to guard the ballot boxes.

NO LEGAL PROVISION
“Though there is no legal provision for Party agents to act as security for electoral materials, in the present circumstance, Chairperson of the Guyana Elections Commission made a decision on 15 March, 2020 that one agent per political party be accommodated in GECOM’s compound for the sole purpose of watching containers with General and Regional Elections (GRE) 2020 ballot boxes. “In fact, pre-dating GRE 2020, there is an administrative arrangement for all contesting parties to place a padlock on each container with ballot boxes,” GECOM explained.

The Commission, however, notes that only the two major political parties, the A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance for Change (APNU+AFC) and the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C), have placed chains and padlocks on each container in the custody of the Commission.

Nonetheless, the Commission has disclosed that it has had reason to caution agents of the various political parties about their conduct, after the safety and security of its staff and compound were compromised.

“As of 25 March, 2020, political parties were asked to desist from photographing and taking videos of staff members and GECOM’s routine operations,” GECOM said, adding: “In light of the foregoing, the Commission is requesting for party agents to observe the Commission’s security protocol and desist from peddling misinformation in this regard.”

While only one agent per party is allowed within GECOM’s compound on a nightly basis, scores of supporters, particularly those aligned with the PPP/C, have been gathering in the vicinity of the Commission’s headquarter, thereby posing both safety and health concerns.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_27_03_2020

Dear Editor,
Today, Guyanese are faced with two extremely harmful conditions. One, the coronavirus, and two, our man-made virus as a result of the 2020 general & regional elections.
The first is universal and not of our own making, except that referred idiotic statements from certain quarters that the coronavirus has a political dimension.
We note that even the heir to the British Throne has been diagnosed positive.
We have learnt hundreds dying in Italy, loved ones unable to attend and take part in final funeral rites. In the USA there is a lock down, groceries and supermarkets’ shelves are empty as a result of panic buying. In India, millions with no access to potable water supply and basic sanitary facilities face the inevitable.
A similar situation exists in the African Sub Continents
China, thanks to their very early astringent measures, has witnessed a reduction in deaths.
Examples of a number of celebrities are positive, sportsmen, an 18-year-old is positive. In summary, no one in the world is spared from this pandemic.
For us in Guyana, it is clear we do not have the capability to deal with an outbreak. Countries with more financial and technological resources are having great difficulty satisfying the populace as a result of this pandemic.
Guyanese from the North-West to the Corentyne, from the coastal belt to the Rupununi need to comply with what may seem stringent and extreme measures so as to ensure that COVID-19 does not enter our borders.
For many of us, having some small funerals, no parties, and a general lock down may seem traumatic and as I have heard from some, they feel that these strong measures are unreasonable and unnecessary.
Dear Editor, let us use your columns to persuade every Guyanese family from the coast to the hinterland, from the riverine areas to subscribe and practice the wisdom that prevention, no matter how costly, or stressful, is by far better than cure.
In any case, if there is an outbreak, where will we find the hospital beds, medicines and ventilators from? Every group, irrespective of religious, social or political leaning should be at one in an effort to keep this deadly virus away and at bay.
The other great difficulty Guyanese face is the stress and strain of elections 2020.
I dictate this letter as we enter another round of legal challenges by both sides of our unhappy political divide.
I ask when will this nonsense end?
As one with nearly seven decades in the political hustings, pre and post-election day 2020 constitute the most bizarre period of our modern epoch.
An unhappy feature of this last several weeks has been the pronouncements by letter writers and statements, by some of my friends pointing fingers without credible evidence.
Often time, one gentleman, of course, talks about rigging.
In each and every case, no credible evidence but relying on fake-news churned out by an extremely affective PR establishment.
We listened insinuations that the President has been violating the Constitution. Those soothsayers must be specific and quote from our Constitution what articles are being compromised.
Those of us with experience since Universal Adult Suffrage in 1953 will know that GECOM was established as an agreement by the major political parties as an independent entity, and so it is. If therefore, GECOM has made a misstep or as the old people say, ‘messed up,’ this could not be blamed on any one external to GECOM.
Those who demanded the absolute independence of GECOM, ‘can’t have their cake and eat it.’ For me, the 2020 election was launched on an unhappy note, using a list of electors that was clearly bloated. Where else could you have a population of 750,000 and a Voters’ list with 600,000 voters?
As I understand it, the principled members of the coalition wanted house-to-house registration completed but GECOM aborted the process.
All those who now shout and point fingers ought to know that an election with a bloated list offers the opportunity for corrupt practices on Election Day, particularly, where in some areas, a certain political party is dominant.
Those last few hours on Election Day where observers would have retired for their coffee break, that is where the skulduggery takes place.

Where we have seen votes cast for a particular party was more that the total number of voters, in certain voting centres.

Based on my experience, I drew this to the attention of certain Officials and suggested that these observers concentrate their attention in certain parts of Guyana. I witnessed in an area in Georgetown, near to my residence, an observer, much older than I am, and who appeared to be feeble, but could pontificate after March 2. But even worse, was the fulmination of foreigners who keep forgetting that we became an independent sovereign state in 1966. These folks somehow, feel that they can treat us in the same way that the estate overseers treated my adult ancestors – calling them pejoratively as ‘boys.’

They forgot that ‘Massa Day’ done.

One irritating example was when the Canadian High Commissioner could improperly storm into a Meeting of GECOM attempting to tell the commissioners how to do their work. We must not ignore the fact that the antecedents of this diplomat is from India and that she spends a lot of her time at the Everest Sports Club (formerly, East Indian Cricket Club) is of some significance, and as a proud Guyanese, I cannot avoid the perception, a tinge of racism by this diplomat representing her country.

Canada and Guyana have always enjoyed friendly and respectful relations.

Speaking for myself, I don’t have to be afraid to tell this ambassador, she has over-stepped protocol and as one of our elders said before we got Independence, “this confounded nonsense must stop.” If she has the power to block any Visa application to Canada, it wouldn’t matter one hoot to me. I can spend the rest of my life in sunny Guyana and continue to make efforts to yield not peel and to help mend not rend the slender of our Afro, Indo Community.

So easy for me, because my wife is the product of these two groups of gallant, gracious Guyanese. We must not encourage those who, or otherwise, try to rend and not mend.
I am yet to hear from those who now write and are critical of the government, anything about the assault on our sovereignty and independence of GECOM. We have not heard a word from these honourable gentlemen about the assault by Mr. Yearwood on a diminutive Afro-Guyanese female, not a word on the attack of the school bus, not a word from the cutlass yielding activist who threatened police officers, not a word when the top brass of a particular political party promised to ‘deal’ with the two female police officers, who were merely carrying out their duties at the GECOM Office.

The last threat I heard, saying that if “President Granger swear in, he will be followed and harassed. This reminds me of what a young family friend and former Colonel in the USA Army, Brian Chin, said to me in a different context, that some may have the intention but not the capability. Let us have peace, let GECOM do its work as an independent entity and settle down to face tomorrow.

Regards,
Hamilton Green

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_27_03_2020

Dear Editor,
Attention is drawn to a report in Stabroek News that notwithstanding GECOM’s advice that it will await the court’s decision on the recount, “Analysts have argued that the broad powers conferred on GECOM by the constitution permit it to continue taking necessary actions and that ultimately the Chair of the Commission, Claudette Singh, will have to ensure that a recount of the votes of Region Four is done as she has given an undertaking to Chief Justice Roxane George” (March 26, 2020 ‘GECOM says awaiting court ruling before any further actions-Claudette Singh facing key decisions’)

I don’t know who these analysts are that Stabroek News is referring to but they, like every Guyanese, should know that laws are important because they serve as guidelines towards a civil society. Laws keep and guide us and help to maintain order. They are the only thing, in a world peopled by diverse groups, interests, values, cultures etc. that would prevent persons from taking advantage and exploiting others, even acting like barbarians. It would be a case of survival of the fittest and well connected.

The Judiciary in Guyana, particularly within recent time, has demonstrated a level of independence that must be safeguarded and built on.  It has handed down judgment that has impacted on both sides, positively and negatively. This is the only branch of government, to date, that has remained unscathed in the politics of discrediting, undermining and destruction that Guyana is facing.  It is urged that we seek to respect its important and vital role to the preservation of this nation’s health.

GECOM Chair, Justice (ret’d) Claudette Singh SC, is on record committing to a recount, be it in Region Four and/or all 10 regions. What is yet to be determined is whether GECOM can yet do the recount.  The court’s decision will determine this, not the speculation of unidentified analysts or others setting out to cajole, intimidate or harass the learned Justice.  This is the only key decision the chair must face because the opinion of the court is the only one that matters.

We must await the court’s decision. To disregard the input of an institution that Justice Singh has been a member of – at amongst the highest level – and has helped to shape is not only offensive, but disrespectful to the Judicature and her legal contributions to this nation.  It must stop.

Justice Singh is also on record committing to respect the Constitution and Laws of Guyana and the ruling of the court in matters relating to GECOM. Thus far this has been honoured and all law-abiding citizens and media must rally around her.

Regards,
Lincoln Lewis

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_27_03_2020

Dear Editor,
The election impasse between the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) and the opposition People’s Progressive Party (PPP) persists without mitigation, except a lull for an imminent Supreme Court ruling on the sub judice matter. The impasse arose because opposition leader, Bharrat Jagdeo, and the PPP fraternity, including some private sector actors, are seeking to impose a counterfeit “birthright” to dominance of Guyana.  The actions of this group of “Orwellians” are imperiling the rule of law and democracy.
Their exudation of this contrived supremacy has engendered a specious morality where, for them, the law is malleable and applies to them only on their terms. It is this hegemony of lawlessness which they advance as “democracy.” In reality, this pathology is the Orwellian Entitlement Syndrome (OES).

FANTASY SUPERIORITY
Their fantasy of superior citizenship fuels their drive to manipulate the law on a presumption that they alone control commerce, industry and capital in the country and, therefore, their contempt for authority suggests the thinking that such affluence entitles them to domination, and more so, flagitious conduct. It is no wonder that they attempt to challenge judges who rule against them with impunity. No wonder why they threaten police officers who disallow their lawlessness with dismissal, if they return to government.  The masquerader in chief of their apparent junta has committed treasonous acts against the state. He has also threatened to “go after” political opponents and their families presumably with death squads much like the old days. This insidious rhetoric has aroused sagaciousness in Guyanese. It is easy to recognise that the brazen effrontery is given oxygen by pronouncements by international actors, whose irresponsible narration are talking points provided by PPP lobbyist.   Someone recently remarked that when the unrest they are instigating begins, which of the instigators will survive? Do we need further evidence of how provocative and combustible this rhetoric is in a volatile environment?

FOREIGN OBSERVERS
Foreign observers have pronounced that results from Region Four are “unverified,” because the returning officer (RO) did not entertain objections during the vote ascertainment process. The PPP has weaponised these uninformed statements. They purport that “unverified” results are fraudulent results. However, Chief Justice Roxane George-Wiltshire, in her March 11, 2020 judgment, held that the RO must use numbers he received from presiding officers, and that “verification” is not provided for in law.
No doubt, some of the observers’ pronouncements emboldened Jagdeo and his comrades. They stormed the Elections Commission with guns and inspired riots. Supporters in Region Five chopped police officers and assaulted innocent citizens and school children.  Victims await charges and prosecutions of the perpetrators.

THE ELECTIONS RESULTS
Declarations by the 10 ROs show that the APNU+AFC Coalition has won the elections. Chief Elections Officer (CEO), Mr. Keith Lowenfield, has submitted his report to Commission’s Chairman, Justice (ret’d) Claudette Singh, for the final declaration of the results. The PPP has insisted on a ballot recount in District Four, although GECOM has already denied all recounts on account of nonconformity to the law. Also, the statutory period for recounts has long expired. A subsequent CARICOM recount initiative, which was widely viewed as illegal, was halted by the Supreme Court, pursuant to a lawsuit. This case resumed on March 25, 2020, before Justice Franklyn Holder; who has been subjected to abominable, intimidation attempts and bigoted attacks on his family by PPP websites.

THE LAW AND THE COURTS
Our courts exist to interpret and enforce the law. The law proscribes challenges to elections results, except by way of election petition. The Orwellians believe that they are above the law. Hence, they are circumventing an elections petition and are using the recount provision and court injunctions to challenge the election results. They must not be allowed to manipulate the law and the court for political expediency, as if the court is a personal football.  The no-confidence motion cases saw PPP lawyers eloquently and vociferously argue that Charandass Persaud’s election to Parliament can only be challenged by way an elections petition. Chief Justice, Roxane George-Wiltshire, and the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) agreed and ruled in their favour. Now, in 2020, they’ve come to the court with a reverse argument.

PPP’S HISTORY OF SUBVERTING DEMOCRACY AND THE LAW
Laws are constant. They don’t change based on which party is in government or for a political party’s misfortune. The December 20, 1997 Stabroek News editorial precisely delineated the PPP’s conduct when opposition parties challenged the tabulation of votes in the December 15, 1997 election. Quote: “The Chairman of the Elections Commission, Mr. Doodnauth Singh, yesterday declared the presidential candidate of the People’s Progressive Party, Mrs. Janet Jagan, the duly-elected President of Guyana even though the final count of votes was not complete and the votes in quite a number of boxes remained to be counted,” end quote.

In the December 15, 1997 elections, PPP Returning Officers refused to “verify” SoPs and denied all requests for recounts. They merely declared the results and closed the process. When word leaked that the opposition PNCR was seeking an injunction to stop the declaration of the results, the PPP secretly and unlawfully swore Mrs. Janet Jagan in as President, while the votes were still being counted. Mrs. Jagan and her bodyguards later assaulted the chief marshal of the Supreme Court who served her with the injunction, which she pitched to the ground. Where was their commitment to democracy and the rule of law then?

THE LAW IN 2020 IS THE SAME AS 1997
Subsequently they made substantial submissions to the court detailing why the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter, except when the PNCR files an elections petition to challenge the elections results. Now they have abandoned this mantra which they intrepidly proclaimed in 1997 and 2019. Ironically, the PNCR filed an election petition, which was heard by then Supreme Court Justice, Claudette Singh – the incumbent Chairman of GECOM.

Justice Singh vitiated the December 15, 1997 elections results and ordered fresh elections. Guyana is a functioning democracy with an independent and efficient judiciary. The judicial process must be allowed to function without external interference. The process worked in 1997 and in 2019 when the court ruled against the government in the no-confidence vote.
INTERFERENCE IN THE ELECTIONS
Western countries must not be allowed to abrogate the mandate of the courts of Guyana to themselves. Statements like ‘“a transition of government…would be unconstitutional”… and ..regardless of how the Guyana Supreme Court rules the installation of a new government based on the declared results will be deemed illegitimate..’ must be rejected. Guyana is a sovereign, democratic state. Interference in Guyana’s elections to tip the scales for a particular party, and pre-emption of its courts violate international law.

THE COURT IS ARBITER OF ELECTIONS DISPUTES
This elections matter is before our courts. Guyana’s history of obeying judgments of the court has enriched our democracy. GECOM, not the government, controls the elections process. The Orwellians hiding behind the skirts of diplomats and calling for sanctions to hurt Guyanese and destabilise the Caribbean, are the same dastardly cowards who perpetrated genocide in Guyana.

Their foreheads are marked from their crimes of extrajudicial killings, gun and drug smuggling and money laundering. But for how long can their lobbyist, Mercury, hoodwink world powers? For how long can the Orewllians play deceptive games in the arena of international politics? We will see!

Regards,
Rickford Burke

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_27_03_2020

–Lawyers argue

By Svetlana Marshall

THE actions of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), its Chairman and Chief Elections Officer (CEO) are subject to judicial review on the grounds that they are public functionaries and entities, Attorney-at-Law Mayo Robertson said as he established the Court’s jurisdiction to hear the case brought by the Ulita Moore – a private citizen.
In her Fixed Date Application (FDA) filed on March 17, Moore asked the High Court to rule that the decision by GECOM, its Chairman and CEO, to have the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) supervise a National Recount of all the votes cast at the March 2 Elections is in contravention of the Constitution and the Representation of the People Act. Additionally, Moore wants the Court to prohibit GECOM from conducting, what she considers, an unlawful recount of the votes, and to have the already declared results of the 10 Electoral Districts made final.

However, the issue of the Court’s jurisdiction to adjudicate over the matter arose last Tuesday, by the lawyers representing the Leader of the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) List of Candidates, Bharrat Jagdeo – an added respondent in the matter.
But Robertson, in his written submissions, said that Jagdeo, through his lawyers, inaccurately contends that Section 140 (1) of the Representation of the People Act bars the Court from hearing such an application.

Section 140 (1) states: “Except to the extent that jurisdiction in that behalf has been conferred, and the exercise thereof is required, by the Constitution or any law made under article 163 thereof (which provides for the determination by the Supreme Court of Judicature of questions as to membership of the National Assembly and elections thereto) and save as hereinbefore provided to the contrary, no question whether any function of the Elections Commission or of any of its members has been performed validly or at all shall be enquired into in any court.”

Robertson submitted that Section 140 (1) of the Act cannot operate as an “ouster” of judicial supervision of the Elections Commission’s acts and or omissions.
In support of his arguments, the Attorney cited the fundamental principle outlined by Lord Reid in the case – Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission [1969]. He submitted that Jagdeo, in his submissions, cited a number of authorities which contradict the decision in Anisminic on the treatment of the ouster clauses. He further pointed out that in the case – the AG of Barbados and Ors v Joseph and Boyce, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) on considering the effect of ouster clauses in the context of constitutional powers, adopted the Anisminic approach.

“The functions and powers of the Elections Commission which are under consideration are rooted in article 162 of the Constitution. The Applicant alleges that the Respondents have acted in excess of that jurisdiction and such actions and/or inactions must be amenable to judicial review. Thus, it is submitted that the case of Anisminic is the only authority on point to address the section 140 (1) ouster clause. Section 140 (1) must therefore be strictly construed so as to preserve the ordinary jurisdiction of this Honourable Court to hear the Fixed Date Application,” Robertson told the High Court.

It was noted too in responding to an application by Aubrey Norton for Writs of Certiorari and Prohibition, Justice Desiree Bernard, in her capacity of Chief Justice, had to consider a Notice of Motion for an order of Certiorari to quash the decision of the Chairman of the Elections Commission to declare Janet Jagan President of the Guyana. On the issue of jurisdiction, Chief Justice Bernard indicated that the Court possessed the jurisdiction to order Certiorari to lie against the decisions of the Elections Commission and its Chairman.
“The Anisminic approach was expressly adopted in Barnwell v Attorney-General and Another (1993) 49 WIR 88 wherein the Court of Appeal of Guyana in considering a Commission’s powers held that although article 226(6) of the Constitution precluded a court from inquiring into whether the commission had validly performed any function vested in it by the Constitution, the court was nevertheless able to inquire into the manner in which the commission set about its decision-making or any procedural impropriety in breach of the Constitution,” Robertson further submitted.

It was noted that under Section 140(1) of the Act the Court has no jurisdiction to determine whether the Elections Commission has performed or discharged its functions and duties validly; the Act does not and cannot oust the Court’s jurisdiction from considering whether the Commission’s decision to not perform its functions was done so validly.
“The Applicant is not complaining about a function of the Elections Commission or any function having been “performed” by its members. On the contrary, the Applicant is complaining about the Elections Commission having failed to perform and/or having omitted to perform, their relevant functions concerning the declaration of the results,” he pointed out.

Noting that the Representation of the People Act clearly outlines the procedures and functions of the Commission and its officers, Mayo pointed out that according to Section 96 (1), the Chief Elections Officer is mandated to calculate the total number of valid votes for each List of Candidates once the Returning Officers have made their declarations. He is then mandated to compile and submit a report to the Elections Commission for their consideration and final declaration.

“In the case at bar, all Returning Officers of the respective electoral districts have made their declarations of the results. the last being the declaration of Electoral District No. 4 which was done on 13 March 2020. Notwithstanding this fact, the Respondents have failed to act in accordance with section 96 and 99 of the Representation of the People Act and formally ascertain the results of the elections and prepare the report to be furnished to the Elections Commission,” he submitted.
This jurisdictional case will be heard in the High Court today before Justice Franklin Holder.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_27_03_2020

…Harmon urges parties to “sit and work out our differences”

By Svetlana Marshall

CALLS by the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) and its allies for the ABCE countries to impose sanctions on Guyana amid the current electoral impasse are unpatriotic, A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance for Change (APNU+AFC) Executive Member, Joseph Harmon said on Thursday.

In recent days, there have been open calls by the PPP/C and its supporters for the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Canada and the European Union to impose sanctions on Guyana amid allegations of electoral fraud, although, to date, those claims have been unfounded.

Warning that an imposition of sanctions on Guyana would stymie its development, Harmon told reporters during a press conference at APNU+AFC’s Campaign Headquarters: “I think that is very anti-national; very anti-national, and I don’t see any country in the world that actually would want to invite that level of sanction on its country, knowing fully well the developmental path on which we are on.” Leader of the Opposition Bharrat Jagdeo has been rallying up both local and international support for Guyana to be sanctioned, but Harmon warned that no one would be spared if the country is sanctioned. “Anyone who feels that sanction would only affect one group of persons, they are probably not thinking well, because, once Guyana is affected, we all are affected. And so, sanction is not something that you play around with,” the APNU+AFC Executive said.

PEACE OFFERING
In the presence of the Chairman of AFC Raphael Trotman, Harmon extended an olive branch of sorts to the other political parties that would have contested the March 2, 2020 elections, in the hope that together they can arrive at an amicable solution to the impasse. “I would encourage all the parties to let us sit and work out our differences. Sanction is not the way; this is not a way,” he said, while iterating that the APNU+AFC, and by extension the Government, is concerned about the threats of international sanction, and will take the necessary steps to avert such actions.
Amid allegations of electoral fraud, the UK, Canada, the European Union and the US, along with a number of Electoral Observation Missions (EOMs), such as the Carter Center, the Organisation of American States (OAS), the Commonwealth and the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) have all called for transparency in the just-concluded National and Regional Elections.

In the interest of greater transparency and accountability, President David Granger, on March 14, invited CARICOM to supervise a national recount of all the votes cast at the March 2 General and Regional Elections.

While the electoral process itself was regarded as having been “smoothly executed” by the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), things went downhill during the tabulation of the votes cast in Region Four (Demerara-Mahaica). The tabulation process for Region 4 has been marred by a series of events, from the Returning Officer and his staff falling sick, to the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) storming the GECOM command center, to an injunction barring the declaration of the results, and subsequently a series of objections. On March 11, Chief Justice Roxane George-Wiltshire invalidated the March 5 declaration made by the Region 4 Returning Officer, Clairmont Mingo, after it was found that he had tabulated the Statements of Poll (SOPs) in the absence of persons entitled to be present, as outlined in Section 84 of the Representation of the People Act.
But though Mingo, in keeping with the ruling of the High Court, on March 13 tabulated the SOPs in the presence of those entitled to be there, his final declaration was again rejected by the PPP/C and a number of other political parties.

FURTHER DOWNHILL
It was after that second declaration that President Granger and the Leader of the Opposition agreed to a recount, but attempts by GECOM to facilitate such a recount was met with objections. GECOM’s Attorney Excellence Dazzell as well as the country’s Chief Parliamentary Counsel, Charles Fung-A-Fat both advised against the CARICOM initiative. The situation was further compounded when a private citizen secured an injunction from the High Court, barring the Elections Commission from declaring the results. The substantive case is currently before Justice Franklin Holder.

Iterating the Coalition’s respect for the Constitution, the Laws of Guyana, as well as GECOM, which latter institution is an independent constitutional body, Harmon said the Party is in full support of any credible mechanism that falls within the Constitution and Electoral Laws of the country, be it a recount, or an elections petition, to avoid any sanction.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_27_03_2020

Dear editor,

So the geriatric junior attorney who has been in hibernation, exhausted from his recent racial diatribe against H.E. President Granger, has finally arisen but still bothered by uncontrollable ranting and barking, like that of a rabid canine. On this occasion, his barking, but thankfully no bites, are directed at the honourable GECOM Chairwoman, Justice (ret’d) Claudette Singh. Unsurprisingly, for someone with his limited understanding of the law and no credibility after he abandoned his client, Glenn Lall, he was able no spell injunction albeit not understand the meaning of it. As a highly-trained medical doctor but not a lawyer, I do recognise that an injunction simply means, full stop. Stop whatever the injunction says you should not do or you can be charged for contempt of court and be dumbed in jail at a time when the courts are shut for at least a month. Look, that may be a part of Chris’ bucket list, but I’m sure it’s not one of the retired Judge and now Chairwoman of GECOM, fantasies.

So the geriatric, grey hair and alopecia junior attorney wrote a missive titled, “I find it hard to be convinced that GECOM Chair is not playing the games of APNU+AFC.” Of course it was published in the PPP local news outlet, Stabroek News. We all know that Chris has labelled himself as many things: accountant, lawyer, oil and gas consultant, politician. In essence, Chris has proven himself, a jack of all trades but a master of none. Now he has anointed himself with a new title, Psychic. The fact is that APNU+AFC has been absolutely silent as this electoral process is taken through its paces. Therefore, the only way that APNU+AFC could have been communicating with the Madam Chair is via telepathic means. We do know dogs are ultra-sensitive compared to us humans, but I am not so sure that biologically, Chris is in that grouping.

So now the geriatric junior attorney’s new baby gripe is the decision of GECOM to await the court ruling before they take any action as it pertains to the election. We all know that GECOM is constrained by an injunction and the legal concept of sub judice, but not Chris. The ‘not fit and proper’ Chris, who describes the Chairwoman as invisible and ineffective, stated that, “GECOM has very wide powers regarding the conduct of elections.” The geriatric and junior attorney got that right, but what he forgot after his quick google search is that GECOM does not have wide powers to break the law or disregard injunctions. I know that will take some time to get into Chris’ head but I’m a very patient tutor, I’ll wait.

And you would have thought that Chris would have taken the fifth after multiple legal blunders, but absolutely not. He is now recommending that while GECOM is under injunction, they can carry out a full internal invention. Chris they can’t. They just can’t. What are they investigating? Who would be the investigators? What would be the TOR? Who would be the witnesses? And therein lies the problem Chris. The very witnesses are providing evidence in court. They cannot simultaneously provide evidence to GECOM or they will be guilty of sub judice. The point, Chris, is that if an organisation has a matter that is before the courts, they would sensibly place internal investigation on hold for that very reason. Also during the court case, new evidence may arise which can inform the company’s internal investigations. Good reasons to wait Chris. I’m so glad that you were not made GECOM chair.

Then the foolish Chris is recommending that Mingo be relieved of his duties without due process. The psychic Chris, with canine senses, has smelt fraud in GECOM. He has not provided an iota of evidence of same but is essentially indulging himself in echolalia, which is characteristic of parrots. Chris heard others saying fraud and he just went about repeating it like a green wing parrot. Chris you can’t terminate the contract of an employee without due process or you can be taken to a tribunal for wrongful dismissal. Chis that process can be costly hence the reason why companies have competent lawyers to advise them and not geriatric junior attorneys.

The ‘not fit and proper’ Chris, like a green wing parrot indulges himself once again in echolalia. He heard others saying that Ulita Moore is an APNU+AFC candidate and he just went about repeating it like a green wing parrot. The fact is that APNU+AFC list of candidates is public and all Chris needs to do is to peruse it. What he would discover is that Ulita Moore is not an APNU+AFC candidate. She is a private citizen just like Cedric Richardson and Anil Nandlall’s driver.

So, after reading Chris’ post-hibernation missive, I do have to wonder if he has completely awakened. The content and construct of the letter is suggesting that he is a deep somnolent state, with Rapid Eye Movement (REM) inducing nightmares. Chris is still stuck in the apaan jaat era, hence he feels that only the dominantly Indo-Guyanese PPP has a right to utilise the court. Ulita Moore, an Afro-Guyanese should not enjoy that right. Like his geriatric mate, Ralph Ramkarran, he is once again bordering on the perception of being racist. Ralph had no qualms with Anil Nandlall’s driver being able to pay for the services of expensive lawyers or Cedric Richardson being able to pay for the services of expensive lawyers to the level of the CCJ, but Ulita Moore’s source of income and lawyers’ fees they both question. Also those PPP clients were labelled as private citizens, but Ulita Moore is tagged to the political party she supports.

Concerningly, the language that Chris used to describe Justice Singh can be perceived and should be condemned, as sexist. In my opinion if this geriatric junior attorney has any sense of decency, self-respect and dignity, he would simply, quietly return to his hibernating hole. This somnolent state, that he is clearly lacking, may not only go a long way in re-establishing those damaged neuronal connections, but may very well protect him from the deadly Coronavirus.

Regards,
Dr. Mark Devonish

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_27_03_2020

– GECOM says commission will act only after judicial review

The Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) has made it clear that it has no intention of overstepping the guidance of the court in its declaration of the final results of the 2020 General and Regional Elections.

The commission, through its Public Relations Officer (PRO), Yolanda Ward, stated, on Wednesday, that it is in receipt of a number calls from the public domain by political parties and other stakeholders for it to take steps to ensure the electoral process ends in the shortest possible time.

However, Ward said that, while it is understandable that emotions are high, the commission is awaiting the ruling of the court and will only take further steps when this is done.
“While the anxiety and frustration of the electorate is understandable, the commission is cognisant that the matter is sub judice and therefore awaits the outcome of the legal proceedings currently engaging the attention of the court to inform its deliberations and next steps. The Guyana Elections Commission as an autonomous constitutional agency is guided by a legal framework and therefore it is imperative that it abides by the decisions of the court,” she explained.

Ward said that while GECOM may appear silent on the matter, it is committed to ensuring the March 2, 2020 elections conclude in a manner that is guided by the court.

She explained in the release: “Though it may appear that GECOM is silent and not taking all necessary steps to arrive at a conclusive decision; the fact that injunctions were granted restraining GECOM officials from proceeding with the national recount supervised by CARICOM and setting aside or varying the declaration of the returning officers of the 10 electoral districts and from substituting or replacing the said declaration of the returning officers until the hearing and determination of the judicial review; the commission cannot pronounce on this matter. In this regard, until these matters are properly ventilated in court and a decision is given, GECOM is unable to take any further action.”

The opposition and some stakeholders, over the past days, have been calling on GECOM to take action and even on the President to order the commission on the steps it should take.
In more than one addresses to the nation, the Head of State, who has repeatedly iterated his respect for the Constitution, laws of the country, Judiciary and GECOM, has stated that the independent institutions – the court and GECOM – must be allowed to carry out their mandate.

“I have iterated, always, my commitment to respect the Constitution of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana, to protect the integrity of the chairperson and members of the elections commission and to obey the rulings of the courts. I am confident that these institutions, once allowed to function without interference, will provide a solution to the present situation,” he told the nation during a past address.

GECOM’s plan for a national recount was halted last week when the High Court granted an interim injunction blocking same. The injunction, which was granted by Justice Franklin Holder in the High Court on Tuesday, was filed by a private citizen, Ulita Grace Moore, against GECOM; its Chair, Justice (Ret’d) Claudette Singh; and the Chief Elections Officer (CEO), Keith Lowenfield. Moore, who is being represented by Attorney-at-Law, Mayo Robertson, secured a total of four interim orders, which will, in effect, bring the electoral process to a halt until the judicial review is completed.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_03_26_2020