Dear editor,
I DO wonder if you or the reader can add some clarity to my thought processes, as I try to gain an understanding of the PPP and its sidekick parties.

Let’s for a second place ourselves in the position of a fictional farmer by the name of Mr. Common Sense. You see, Mr. Common Sense had twelve Holstein cows. For the last few weeks an unreasonable and shameless bandit has been stealing Mr. Common Sense’s Holstein cows. Now Mr. Common Sense, who lives on a remote farm without electricity or CCTV, was informed by his neighbour, Mr. Snitch that an unknown bandit would arrive between 8am and 12pm, when Mr. Common Sense is at the local market to offload his produce. The bandit would then lure a cow onto his tractor trailer before he hurriedly makes good his escape, along the dirt road.

Mr. Common Sense, recognising that he is down to his last cow, made a decision that 8am-12pm is the time he would, with a fully loaded shotgun, await the cow thief. So bright and early at 6am, Mr. Common Sense positioned himself in the shrubs, to give the bandit a very unpleasant surprise. Like clockwork, the bandit turned up at 10am. Under the threat of being shot, the bandit surrendered, the local sheriff was summoned and the bandit arrested.

Now let’s examine this scenario.The PPP and its sidekick parties were crying about everything, Mr. Mingo, the RO for Region Four, did. They cried about the commonly used spreadsheet, despite it was used for eight of the nine regions, six that they won. As a result, Mr. Mingo used GECOM’s SoPs. They cried that they wish to see the tabulated votes that Mr. Mingo has on the SoPs. Mr. Mingo got a projector and projected the SoPs unto a screen. Before they ultimately walked out, they cried that they cannot see the serial numbers on the SoPs. Mr. Mingo rightfully declared APNU+AFC as the winners of Region Four after tabulation of the ballots. This declaration triggered a 12-hour period for PPP and their sidekick parties to challenge it, which by law would have resulted in the ballot boxes of Region Four being opened and ballots recounted. Like Mr. Common Sense, they knew this was their last chance to prove electoral fraud, as they were all crying. It is clear that Mr. Common Sense took his time seriously. He was there two hours early, awaiting the bandits because he recognised that it was his last chance. Clearly, the PPP and its associated sidekicks were not that serious. All eight of the parties submitted their applications for a recount out of time. Not one presented themselves at the stipulated time. I will quote GECOM verbatim. “RO denied request for recount, since none of the parties adhered to the statutory timeline to apply for the appointment of counting agents. In this regard, no counting agent was duly appointed for any parties and only acounting agent can request a recount.”

Mr. Editor, the new fad or what I would describe as the new foolery is to sleep in front of the Arthur Chung Conference Centre (ACCC) to guard ballot boxes. Mind you, the ACCC has more CCTV’s looking at it than that presently in all of London. Also Freddie Kissoon, the government critic, neighbours the ACCC. Freddie is forever peeping through his windows looking out for God knows what. The last tim the AFC had a conference at the ACCC, Freddie Kissoon wrote a few gossip columns on what he saw when he peeped through his window, at the wee hours of the morning. With this knowledge, Lenox Shuman, the de facto leader of the PPP sidekick parties and other PPP sympathisers, had no reason to be sleeping in front of the ACCC to guard ballot boxes. I say this to make the point that if the PPP and its sidekick parties were serious about a recount of Region Four, they would have all slept in front of GECOM and as soon as the doors were opened, they would have rushed in with recount applications in hand. That never happened.

It is clear that the PPP and its sidekick parties are all, using hip-hop vernacular, “half stepping” when it comes to the recount of Region Four. They know that the contents of those boxes will end their narrative of rigged elections. They rather that not happen since they are in election mode, campaigning for 2025. They are foolishly sleeping in front of the ACCC to guard ballot boxes is essentially to dramatised their narrative of protecting the boxes from further rigging. Mind you, the ACCC is also guarded by policemen and women along with the million of eyes that traverse the Railway Embankment. PPP and its sidekicks are not serious. They should not be taken seriously. They are a set of attention-seeking Drama Queens.

Regards
Dr. Mark Devonish

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_03_19_2020

Dear Editor,
THE present political crisis over the final results of the 2020 General and Regional elections was expected, since nether the APNU+AFC nor the PPP/C is willing to accept defeat unless it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This is understandable, given that these elections were identified as the “mother” of all elections in Guyana and were driven by the implications of the vast wealth that will come from oil and gas and the inevitable effects on the country, politically, economically and socially.

As a nation, we have refused to address the inherent inadequacies of our electoral and governance systems and have allowed the winner-takes-all system to reign supreme and be viewed as the ultimate prize of elections in Guyana, with little or no regard for the negative impact on governance, economic equity, social cohesion and race relations. Today we are faced with a crisis of our own making. Rather than seeking to resolve it internally as a matter of historic necessity, our leadership, on both sides of the divide, have resorted prematurely to invoking the intervention of external forces. Many of these forces are not at all concerned with Guyanese national interests. For them, the extent to which their geopolitical strategic interests can be achieved underscores where their foremost importance resides. These extra-regional powers have no permanent political alliances in the hemisphere, but are largely motivated by their permanent self-interest. Often, our domestic contestations make us lose sight of this most important lesson of history. We forget that those we are calling on to resolve our current difficulties are the very people who, through their exploitative machinations, are responsible for us being firmly entrenched in our present condition.

As matters now stand our judicial system is being tested in a manner that is unprecedented in our post-independence history. To our credit, our courts have, in the most volatile of conditions, delivered judgements in an impartial manner. In doing so the members of the judiciary to a large extent have asserted their independence to the surprise of a few but in keeping with the expectations of many. What is unfortunate is, the massive pressure being put on the judicial officials by the threats of sanctions from external powers. This can have the effect of making them unwilling parties in compromising their impartiality and independence. There is the old saying that justice must not only be done – but must appear to be done. In these circumstances, it is difficult to see this open, not veiled threats, being helpful in our politically and racially divided society.

Having said the above I wish to point out that the most recent legal challenge to the proposed CARICOM supervision of the recount of votes cast in the March 2, 2020 elections will test the sincerity of all of the forces, both local and foreign, that claimed their commitment to abide by the rule of law and to adhere to the constitution. This matter, I am sure, will finally be determined in the Caribbean Court of Justice.

Regards
Tacuma Ogunseye

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_03_19_2020

ON Sunday March 15, 2020, the International Decade for People of African Descent Assembly-Guyana (IDPADA-G) Coordinating Council convened an emergency meeting of its General Assembly to discuss matters which unfolded following the March 2 General and Regional Elections, in particular, post elections disturbances which included racially motivated attacks.

“This emergency meeting of the IDPADA-G General Assembly sought to address the heightened racial tensions and racially-motivated attacks against people of African Descent in Guyana, since the March 2, 2020 elections,” a release from IDPADA-G said.

It said members of the organisation noted the restraint demonstrated by the African Guyanese community in the face of racially-motivated attacks, “and voiced fear for the safety of our entire community, considering the attacks on innocent school children, the security forces and random African Guyanese.”

The IDPADA-G said it has sought to formally address this matter by acting within its authority as the Country Coordinating Mechanism mandated to respond to the U.N. Resolution 68/237 declaring the Decade, under the theme “People of African descent: recognition, justice and development” and to implement the Programme of Activities for the Implementation of the International Decade for People of African Descent, as elaborated in the U.N.

The General Assembly is said to be the highest decision-making body of the organisation and is comprised of nominated members from the various African organisations that comprise IDPADA-G. The Coordinating Council comprises the Chairman of the organisation, the CEO and the Chairpersons of the various internal committees.

The IDPADA-G said it has compiled a report on the post-elections situation as an input under the reporting obligations of the Secretary-General, and the work of the UNHCHR as the Secretariat for the Decade.

Following a motion passed by IDPADA-G’s General Assembly, the organisation submitted the report along with a petition to the UNHCHR, the broader international community and the local Ethnic Relations Commission to alert them to the recent acts of “racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance” towards African Guyanese.”

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_03_19_2020

Dear Editor
THE Guyana Trades Union Congress (GTUC) applauds the efforts of the CARICOM delegation to assist Guyana during this process, notwithstanding the legal electoral challenges resulting in the CARICOM delegation leaving Guyana, having not been able to conclude its mission. CARICOM Chairperson and Prime Minister of Barbados, the Hon. Mia Mottley, as a member of the legal fraternity, and other CARICOM leaders we are confident would appreciate the legal process being upheld. This is indicative in their expression of continued commitment to Guyana and we encourage that they continue to keep an eye on our legal progress.

In the process of this legal pursuit which every party is entitled to as a means of adjudicating their grievances, the GTUC asks this nation and our political leaders to lend full support to our judiciary in its deliberations. The judiciary of Guyana has distinguished itself as a credible source of power in this country, well respected in the Caribbean jurisdiction and farther afield. Our legal minds, across the spectrum, have more than demonstrated capacity at all times to navigate this process or legal resolution. This new challenge to the recounting of votes is the first of three legal challenges not filed by the opposition People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C). Altogether, these added to other delays have made this the longest election process in the history of Guyana. This is not for us to be proud of, but neither is it a shame. What it demonstrates is a commitment by both parties to operate in a lawful manner, since both parties are entitled to their respective cases being heard in a court of law. That of itself is a win for democracy and we must all be proud, even as we anxiously await the end.

When law and order trumps individual, partisan and lobbying interest, Guyana wins.
GTUC calls on all parties concerned to:

· Respect the right of both parties to exercise all legal means such as injunctions filed on their behalf, since this will allow a court to give guidance and pass judgment at any stage of the process where there is a dispute.

· Recognise that GECOM Chairperson Claudette Singh S.C. is on record as repeatedly stating that in the execution of the electoral process she will be guided by the constitution and Laws of Guyana and judicature.

– GECOM on 17th March, in an effort to facilitate a recount in a duly constituted and legal manner, sought the advice on the “legal ramifications” to recount the votes from Chief Parliamentary Counsel, Charles-Fung-A-Fatt-S.C (Guyana Chronicle, 18th March, 2020 ‘Chief Parliamentary counsel advises GECOM against gazetting order for recount’)
– Such advice was necessary because according to GECOM’s press release (17th March, 2020) the body thought “it is necessary for all the legal issues to be properly addressed, including the gazetting of the process as requested by the high-level CARICOM delegation” to give effect to the aide memoire signed by Messrs. Granger and Jagdeo in the presence of CARICOM Secretary-General, H.E. Irwin Larocque to pave the way for the recount
PPP/C representative Attorney-at-law Anil Nandlall’s contribution to the decision for gazetting argued against GECOM seeking same, pushing instead for them to go ahead with the count. As per Nandlall, “If you also look at Section 22 of the Elections Laws (Amendment) Act you will see that GECOM has a wide array of powers even to make orders, even to override legislation.” His position runs contrary to the respected legal advice provided by the chief parliamentary counsel.

Chief Parliamentary Counsel, Charles-Fung-A-Fatt-S.C, advised accordingly:
– The “provision that the Order is seeking to make has the effect of amending Section 84 of the Representation of the People Act and would there be ex post facto. And that “passing the order would be making a retrospective law and that would affect the vested rights of a person under the Representation of the People Act,”

– “An Order cannot be made under this provision because any instructions or action that the commission takes must be in compliance with the Act. This provision empowers the commission to act administratively through an interpretation of the law as it now stands and does not empower the commission in a law-making capacity to modify the law.”
The nation is reminded that CEO Keith Lowenfield sought to implement an administrative solution that could have prevented this current situation when he suggested that the parties bring their Statements of Poll and do the verification, and “If, at the end of the day, that doesn’t work, the CEO will be involved with his statement to have a resolution to the issue.” This appeared not to have been pursued.
The situation as it currently exists is one where patience must be exercised as all concerned parties utilise lawful means of resolving their contentions. An injunction is before the court and will be heard on Friday, 20th March. GTUC expects the rule of law to obtain and be respected in no different manner than it has been so far in adjudicating our political and elections disputes.

Sacrificing Guyana’s peace and stability is not a price that any political party should ask our people to pay. It is not a price that any individual should seek to pay, given that parties we all represent have access to the law courts and peaceful resolution. As a people we must condemn political efforts from any quarter to derail or discredit the judicial system and process to arrive at a resolution.

Those who proclaim ‘uprightness’ and ‘decency’ should be held to the standards they project. They must respect the laws and call on all parties to follow its mandate. Anyone seeking extra-judicial means whether peaceful or otherwise, to resolve our differences cannot be committed to democratic practices, though they may voice this. People of Guyana, let us not be fooled.

A fight for democracy is about having the election conducted and concluded within the parameters of the laws. We have numerous examples throughout the world and as recent as 2000 in the USA that these can ultimately be determined in a court of law, not merely by individuals, public relations campaigns and groups with different interests. It is a fight for the rule of law to be upheld. We determine this in a court of law and abide by the decisions therein. Finally, a resolution of our differences if not legally perused will and can result in a Guyana that our children would not benefit from. We must demand full compliance with all laws and respect for the court’s decision if we are to protect this nation and our peace, now and in the future.

Regards
Lincoln Lewis
General-Secretary
GTUC

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_03_19_2020

– CARICOM still available to be intermediary

COMMISSIONER of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), Vincent Alexander, said on Tuesday, that the issues emanating from the current electoral process is bigger than the process itself and should not be ignored.

Commissioners Alexander and Charles Corbin spoke with the media last evening after emerging from an hours-long commission meeting.

During that engagement, the commission was setting the stage for the commencement of the national recount of votes of the March 2 polls, as agreed between His Excellency, President David Granger, and Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo, which would have been observed by a high-level team from CARICOM.

Part of that preparation too was ensuring that all legal requirements were in play before moving forward since the process was new to both the commission and Guyana. It was during the process that the commission was made aware of an injunction preventing the procedure from moving forward.

Barring that hiccup, Alexander said as a citizen, the current situation is not good for the country. However, he opined that the issue is way beyond electoral solution and “we have to look for other solutions because the root cause of our problem is not in the electoral process.”

“We have serious problems with the plurality of our society, the distrust, the quest for power from various segments to the ignorance of the real problem and appreciation of the totality of the Guyanese society and we have to seek a solution in that regard,” he told the media.

According to Alexander, “the trust issue” is far beyond anything that GECOM can do. As a commissioner, he assured that processes were in train to determine the legality and validity of the elections process, “but we did not reach the end to make a determination.”
In the meantime, he related that CARICOM has not given up on Guyana. While its service has been withdrawn for the moment, the regional institution has indicated that it is available for intervention if the need arises. GECOM will appear in court on Friday, March 20, to respond to an injunction filed on Tuesday by a private citizen, preventing it from executing an agreed upon aide memoire between President Granger, Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo and CARICOM, requesting the regional body to overlook the recount of votes cast in this year’s General and Regional Elections.

President Granger had sought the intervention of CARICOM’s Chair, Mia Mottley, to bring an end to the questions by both local and international observers and Guyana, about the legitimacy of the elections results. Everything has now been put on hold until the hearing.
“It leaves us to hear what the courts have to say. What we thought could have been a parallel process while we attempted to get the legal processes straightened. All the consultations we have had, and the approaches we have already made, that where we thought we were properly covered to proceed with the activity in accordance with legislation identified and the constitution, we could not get a firm view for support,” Commissioner Corbin stated.  (DPI)

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_03_19_2020

Dear Sir,
I AM paying attention to the utterances of different groups and individuals on the on-going electoral processes for Guyana’s general and regional elections 2020, in the public sphere. It seems to be part of a massive conspiracy unfolding against a particular race of people. It is sad but we all must be very strong in mind and spirit, and equip ourselves as leaders of our communities and the nation as a whole. This is the only path to great success of our beloved Guyana.

Consider, for example, statements by the Private Sector Commission against the Guyana Police Force: “ Private Sector urges police to act impartially,” newsroom.gy, March 18, 2020, the GCCI: “GCCI condemns interference in electoral process” Inewsguyana.com, March 18, 2020… Major General(Retired) Joe Singh: “ Former Army chief Joe Singh writes open letter to President” newsroom.gy, March 18, 2020, and Mr. Seelall Persaud DSM MBA, Retired Commissioner of Police: “ Let us not throw our honour to the dogs”- fmr. Top Cop urges GPF” Inewsguyana.com, March 18, 2020. Quite frankly, I wonder about the metaphor: “… honour to the dogs”. Let me make two comments:

First, all of the above-mentioned groups and individuals have made no bones about their support for and loyalty to a particular political party. Therefore, one could hardly expect them to be objective; all of their statements demonstrate a bias against the APNU+AFC. Second, those statements were published by media owned by members of, or individuals affiliated to a particular political party, in Guyana. Those statements, no doubt, appear to be aimed at the international community, to give a certain negative impression about what is happening in Guyana. Of course, we who live here know better and are very much aware of the truth.

The truth is, the PSC, GCCI, Joe Singh, and Mr. Seelall Persaud are hypocritical in words and deeds. None of those organisations and individuals condemned the rancorous and dangerous invasion of the Guyana Elections Commission’s command centre, on High Street, last week. Even now, they have said nothing about it. In fact, members of the PSC and GCCI were part of that invasion, in which there was damage to property and physical abuse of police ranks and staff of the Election Commission. To date, no one has been arrested for that illegal activity. Nor have they commented on brutish incidents in communities on the East Coast of Demerara, in which children were hurt. Yet, they have the boldness and temerity to publicly call on the police to act professionally, when all that the police is trying to do is to be professional in their conduct and behaviour ,in this situation, created by some of the very people who are now calling on the police to do better. The silence of these organisations and individuals call into question their sincerity and commitment to put Guyana on a trajectory of progress and success.

Finally, the PSC, GCCI, and their cohorts appear to have preempted the outcome of elections long before its conclusion, and it seeking to influence those elections in a particular way. No court of law has adjudged the elections to be fraudulent, in any way. In fact, there has been no elections petition, and even in the case of the injunction before the chief justice last week, no evidence of electoral fraud was presented by anyone. But somehow, those organisations and individuals have already determined that the elections were rigged. These are some of those who have paid lobbyists to talk about sanctions against Guyana for electoral fraud, when our courts have not even heard any petition on any such matter. I call upon our community and national leaderships to be strong, and destroy this very evil plot to submerge the will of the people, by certain political and oppositional forces hard at work, to take power by using elements of the international community, who have been hoodwinked into believing a lie, spread wide and far, by certain creatures of greed and wickedness in our society. Guyana is a functioning democracy: our courts are functioning upholding the laws of this country; our democratic institutions are working. Let us regard the sanctity of our sovereignty.

Regards
Gregory Howe

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_03_19_2020

Dear Editor,
Most Guyanese would agree that there is never a moment in Guyana that lacks interest and excitement, especially since the 2011 Elections. Hardly anyone anticipated that a total recount of all votes cast in the 2020 general and regional elections, under the watchful eyes of a CARICOM team, was going to be required before GECOM could make a declaration of the final results of the poll. And still, this might eventually prove to be the best decision to help a deeply divided people at this time of a moral crisis; and to verify the credibility of GECOM’s administration and conduct of ELECTIONS 2020 and resolve the credibility gap created by the contradictory statements made by the leadership of the People’s Progressive Party/civic (PPP/C), the New Political Parties (ANUG, CG, PRP, TCI, TNM and LJP) and A Partnership for National Unity and Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) Coalition.

A major theme during the 2020 general and regional elections campaign was honesty, decency and integrity in political leadership. Consequently, it’s no surprise that the credibility of GECOM and our political leaders are in the spotlight or under intense public scrutiny. Even though supporters on either side of the political divide do not always tell the truth, it is still true as stated by Donald T. Phillips that “leaders who tell their subordinates the truth, even when the news is bad, gain greater respect and support for ideas than their less virtuous counterparts.” Even now, it is better to tell the truth rather than to lie, for honesty is the best policy.

What then are some of the important points to ponder as regards the proposed national recount?  What will the recount do for Guyana, GECOM, the Observer Groups and Politicians? What are some important benefits of a recount?

Firstly, Guyana will not be put on a blacklist and be regarded as a country with a government elected by an electoral process that was unacceptable or untrustworthy. By allowing an independent high-level Caribbean Community (CARICOM) team to oversee a full elections recount, with GECOM managing the process, it is expected that this move will satisfy the “required standard of fairness and transparency” necessary to ascertain the final results of the elections. Transparency is a most important issue in business, governance, media, and politics today.

When a person is transparent, there is no attempt to lie or cover up. The word transparency implies “light shining through unimpeded” and it denotes openness, the absence of pretense and deceit. President David Granger and Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo must be commended for this agreement, the CARICOM Initiative to monitor a re-count of all ballots. After all, political leadership must model behavior that is guided by a commitment to ethics, transparency and accountability.

Secondly, a national recount can help GECOM to redeem its credibility that has been seriously undermined by the controversy surrounding the counting of votes polled in Region 4. The Returning Officer, Clairmont Mingo, ascertainment of the total votes cast in accordance with the Statements of Poll (for the 879 polling stations) was the major obstacle or difficulty, preventing the Chief Elections Officer, Keith Lowenfield, from making a final declaration of the 2020 General and Regional elections results. The Region Four tabulation disputes triggered many reactions. First, the Organization of American States (OAS) on March 13, 2020 issued a statement explaining that it had no other option but to withdraw its presence from Guyana. According to the OAS team “the numbers that have emanated” since the tabulation process was disrupted is cause for concern and “it is unlikely that one can have a result that is credible and able to command public confidence.” This is a very damning statement.

Then, on the same March 13, 2020, shortly after the start of the court-ordered tabulation of the Statements of Poll, the Ambassador of the United States of America, Sarah-Ann Lynch, British High Commissioner, Greg Quinn, Canadian High Commissioner, Lilian Chatterjee, and the Ambassador of the European Union, Fernando Ponz-Canto, walked out of the Region 4 tabulation process at the Ashmin’s building, High and Hadfield Streets. According to a joint statement released by the four missions: “we are concerned about intimidation tactics we observed against those seeking to ensure that a credible process is followed. We must be clear that in the absence of a credible process, as directed by the Honourable Chief Justice, it is our view that any results for Region 4 which will impact the overall results of the 2 March elections will not be credible and a President sworn in on the basis of those results will not be considered legitimate.” Such is the prospective of our western diplomats.

Besides, the European Union (EU) Election Observation Mission had reason to write the Returning Officer of Region Four, Clairmont Mingo, asking to see the Statements of Poll that he used to prepare the spreadsheet of results which he intended to utilise for the declaration of results for Demerara-Mahaica. This request was made via a letter, dated March 12, 2020, and was being made “pursuant to Section 4 (1) and (3) of the General Elections (Observers) Act, as well as section 6,7,8 and 9 of the Administrative Arrangement between the Delegation of the European Union in Guyana and GECOM.” It clearly brings to light the nature of the Region Four tabulation challenge.

These issues form part of the background for the recount. And, it is expected, that a total recount of the votes from all ten electoral districts (beginning with the largest and most hotly disputed region four) can provide the ideal opportunity to help restore ‘maximum public confidence’ in GECOM’s operations or expose its weak spots. If the recounted ballots’ final score is similar to the results previously declared, it will go a long way for the credibility of the Guyana Elections Commission. However, if the recounted ballots show significant differences from that which was declared for the ten electoral districts (and especially region four) GECOM’s credibility would be severely damaged. And, its staff, especially the presiding officers and returning officers, in particular Mr. Clairmont Mingo, would have demonstrated that they failed to serve with integrity.

Also, the Chief Election Officer, Keith Lowenfield, and the Chairperson of the Elections Commission, Justice (Ret’d) Claudette Singh (although they are both well respected and honourable), because they said nothing as regards the authenticity of the Statements of Poll published by the PPP/C and those Statements of Poll used by Returning Officer Clairmont Mingo to ascertain the results for Region Four, they are answerable. Is this a case where silence is golden? Well, the recount is likely to answer that question.

Thirdly, another benefit of a national recount of ballots, under the supervision of the independent high-level CARICOM team, is the recognition that the election results is likely to receive. The CARICOM Initiative is specifically geared to provide a solution and a final elections result that is expected to receive local as well as international recognition and approval. It will definitely clear the air and settle the facts concerning district four votes; for the electorate and all Guyanese; for the 18 international and local observer groups; especially the ABCE envoys, The European Union, the Organization of American States, CARICOM, the Commonwealth and The Carter Center. These observer groups will be more inclined to accredit elections results that are more in conformity with our electoral laws.
Finally, the recount of ballots for Elections 2020 will definitely be a moment of truth for the political leadership of not only the two major political heavyweights in Guyana, but also for the new political light flyweights and flyweights. One of the heavyweights will be caught red-handed and would likely be tested to its deepest political muscles. The other heavyweight will be visibly happy, but would have to learn quickly a new way of getting things done (with the leadership of the other parties) and to understand, appreciate and navigate the politics of governance in Guyana. For the new political flyweights it will be a reality check for them.

The recount will definitely bring us to that moment of truth when the people of Guyana will find out which one of two political heavyweights (both have claimed victory) has the legitimate right to form the next government for the world’s newest Petro state, Guyana.  It will be another golden opportunity to make real the campaign slogans. ‘STRONGER TOGETHER! MOVING FORWARD TOGETHER!’

Regards,
Pastor Richard Avert James

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_03_18_2020

THE United States has again threatened sanction for persons allegedly engaged in electoral fraud here, although not providing evidence of its claims.

US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, made the comments during a news briefing on Tuesday. “The United States is closely monitoring the tabulation of votes in Guyana ….we join the OAS Commonwealth, EU, CARICOM and other democratic partners who are calling for an accurate count. We commend CARICOM’s role in seeking a swift democratic resolution and it is important to note that the individuals who seek to benefit from electoral fraud and form illegitimate governments/regimes will be subject to a variety of serious consequences from the United States,” Pompeo stated. The US has made similar statements recently regarding Guyana’s election without proffering evidence.

After more than a week of confrontations and legal actions, the votes for District Four for the General and Regional Elections were finally declared by the Returning Officer, Clairmont Mingo, last Friday night, amid heavy police presence at the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) High Street, Kingston Headquarters. According to the declaration, the A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) secured the highest number of votes in both the General and Regional Elections followed by the People’s Progressive Party Civic (PPP/C).

In the General Elections, APNU+AFC secured 136,057 votes in District Four (Demerara-Mahaica), while the PPP/C raked in 77,231 votes. A New United Guyana (ANUG) secured the third largest number of votes with 1,387 votes, followed by Change Guyana with 919 votes; Liberty and Justice Party (LJP) with 761 votes and The Citizenship Initiative, 463 votes. The People’s Republic Party got 389 votes and The New Movement (TNM) 128 votes, while the United Republican Party only managed to rake in 90 votes.

Meanwhile, in the Regional Elections, the APNU+AFC secured 130,289 votes while the PPP/C raked in 74,877 votes. Change Guyana received 914 votes, while 752 votes were cast in favour of the Liberty and Justice Party (LJP); 401 in favour of the People’s Republic Party; 125 in favour of the Victory of the People Party and 98 votes in favour of the United Republican Party. With being declared winner in Region Four, the coalition, based on GECOM’s results, would have won the elections, clinching both the presidency and a one-seat majority in the 65-seat National Assembly. The declaration was challenged by the opposition – PPP and GECOM is still deliberating whether to allow a recount of the votes for all 10 regions.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_03_18_2020

Dear Editor,
IT IS public knowledge that what has been described as a “total recount”, seemingly inspired, perhaps instigated, by CARICOM, of the votes cast in the ten (10) districts at the General and Regional Elections 2020 (GRE’s) is impending.
Whatever semantic jargon be employed to cloak the Terms of Reference (TOR) that will guide the implementation of this so called “total recount” with some semblance of legality, any such “total recount”, if implemented, will be metaphorically dead on arrival at the Caribbean Court of Justice.

We Submit, there is simply no constitutional or statutory basis for it. It is contrary to law. The well-known principle of generous or purposive interpretation of constitutional provisions does not mean that there must and can be some procrustean interpretation of the Election Laws (Amendment) Act #15/2000, Constitution and the Representation of People Act, cap 1:03 Laws of Guyana, to lend either legitimacy or credibility to such a patently misconceived idea. A crystalline distillation, of the relevant provisions of the Constitution, and EL (A) A and ROPA that touches and concerns GRE’s in the sovereign Cooperative Republic of Guyana, and consideration of case law and legal principles about ultra vires and (non) contracting out of statutes, yields the following conclusions of law ; and mixed fact and law. We summarize and state these conclusions briefly;
First, the conjoint effect of article 60,161,162(1) and 226(1) & (7) of the Constitution is that GECOM is a creature of the Constitution which the framers intended in its conduct of GRE’s to be independent, fair, impartial, autonomous and not subject to the control or direction of any other person or authority (except of the course, the Supreme Court of Judicature); Secondly, consistent with the (rebuttable) presumption of constitutionality of the EL (A) A and ROPA< GECOM is bound to give effect, and substantially comply with and obey the provisions of the ROPA. There cannot be violations by GECOM.

Thirdly, the conjoint effect of in particular sections 84,86 ,87, 88, 89, 96 and 99 of ROPA is that the declarations by the ten respective Returning Officers, of the votes cast for each of the contesting political parties in ten (10) districts, are in the events which have happened, (and subject to ascertainment/verification by Chief Election Officer) FINAL and ought to have been (on the assumption of such ascertainment) declared and published by GECOM.
Fourth, the Ventose (2018) 92 WIR 118 decision of the CCJ which concerned Barbadian statue law corresponding to or in pari materia with our ROPA, is we submit, an emphatic rejection of GECOM’s “total recount” policy. That policy is but a flagrant violation of the clear, unambiguous wording of the ROPA. GECOM has no discretionary powers vis-à-vis the ROPA requirements.

Fifth, Parliamentary sovereignty (we do not say supremacy) which by articles 51 and 164 of our Constitution is entrenched at the deepest level in our constitutional architecture, cannot be subverted by, and subordinated to, the whims and fancies of extra- constitutional actors. The ROPA which has imposed specific duties on PO, RO and CEO is an emphatic expression of such sovereignty.

Sixth, (not necessarily in significance) consistently with the finality of the Returning Officers declarations, the APNU+AFC and its presidential candidate David Arthur Granger both have a fundamental right to complain that upon a generous and purposive interpretation of the fundamental right to freedom of expression (article 147) that fundamental right has been, and is being contravened, in relation to it, and him, by GECOM’S delay in its declaration and publication. After all, the raison d’etre, the whole beneficent purpose of forming a political party, expending huge sums of money in the contestation of GRE”s every five years, is to attain victory at the polls by the democratic process encapsulated in, inter alia, the Constitution and the ROPA, and be the Government for the next five (5) years.

In the events which have happened, midnight on March 17, 2020 is the expiry point for the conclusion of declaration and publication. We are fully convinced and have concluded that the proposed “total recount” if implemented, will amount to a blatant abdication by GECOM of its constitutional and statutory duties. Also, a usurpation of parliamentary sovereignty by extra-constitutional actors. Every voting elector- supporter of the APNU+ AFC list must be aggrieved by GECOM’s unreasonable delay in the declaration, publication of the results and the consequential swearing in as President of Mr. David Arthur Granger. Pacification of an electorally defeated, vexed and disappointed Opposition is not provided for in the ROPA, nor is appeasement a constitutional function of GECOM. And what if the “total recount” materially increases the amount of votes in favor of APNU+AFC? Would that increase be valid? We think not. On both principle and authority it cannot be supported.

Regards
Maxwell. E. Edwards
For: Concerned Lawyers

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_03_18_2020

…Legal luminaries say proposed Terms of Reference unconstitutional
…assert GECOM’s sole remit to supervise elections

A NATIONAL recount of the votes cast during the March 2 General and Regional Elections under the supervision of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) would be a complete breach of the Constitution and the Electoral Laws of Guyana, legal luminaries are now arguing. They have pointed to the fact that the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) is the sole authority responsible for the supervision of elections here.

“There is no legal basis in the Constitution or Representation of the People Act, Cap. 1:03, to conduct such a recount; to do so will be tantamount to a usurpation of the functions of GECOM to independently supervise these elections, and equally, GECOM would be abdicating its responsibilities to conduct elections,” the group of concerned legal luminaries, who asked not be named, told Guyana Chronicle.

Last Saturday, Chairman of CARICOM and Prime Minister of Barbados, Mia Mottley, announced that President David Granger and the Leader of the Opposition, Bharrat Jagdeo, have agreed to a national recount under the watch of a high-level CARICOM team but the concerned lawyers said the proposed Terms of Reference (ToR) to govern the process has no legal basis.

“The proposed Terms of Reference, should it be implemented, would amount to a blatant breach of the Constitution and the laws of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana. Therefore, the proposal cannot be supported,” they argued. In justifying their position, the lawyers said after careful deliberation and consideration of the constitutional and statutory provisions governing GECOM and presiding and returning officers, it was found that the Elections Commission is the sole authority responsible for the independent supervision of Elections in Guyana. These provisions, they said, are laid out in Articles 62 and 162 of the Constitution.

The Legal luminaries further pointed to two other provisions in the Constitution that bar CARICOM from supervising the national recount of the votes cast in the 10 Electoral Districts.

1. In accordance with Article 162 (1) (a), the Commission shall exercise general direction and supervision over the administrative conduct of all elections of members of the National Assembly.

2. In accordance with Article 226 (1) and (7), in the exercise of its functions, the Elections Commission shall not be subject to the direction or control of any other person or authority.
Besides, the lawyer pointed out that in the case Christopher Ram v Attorney General of Guyana et al [2019] CCJ 14 (AJ) the CCJ ruled at paragraph 7 that- “Article 106 of the Constitution invests in the President and the National Assembly (and implicitly in GECOM), responsibilities that impact on the precise timing of the elections which must be held. It would not therefore be right for the Court, by the issuance of coercive orders or detailed directives, to presume to instruct these bodies on how they must act and thereby pre-empt the performance by them of their constitutional responsibilities. It is not, for example, the role of the Court to establish a date on or by which the elections must be held, or to lay down timelines and deadlines that, in principle, are the preserve of political actors guided by constitutional imperatives.”

Aside from the supervisory provisions, the legal luminaries submitted that the Representation of the People Act clearly states that declarations made by the respective Returning Officers are final as no lawful request for a recount was made. In the case of Regions Two, Three and Four, requests for recounts in those districts were all denied. On these grounds, the lawyers iterated that there is no legal basis in the Constitution or Representation of the People Act to conduct such a recount.

Abide by constitution
While President Granger has agreed to a national recount, he made it clear that the proposed initiative must be executed in accordance with the Constitution of Guyana.
“…the CARICOM Initiative should operate within the legal framework of the Constitution of Guyana and respect the role of the Elections Commission and the rulings of the Supreme Court. It will not act independently,” President Granger said on Sunday.

In his communication with the CARICOM Chair, President Granger indicated that the ToR governing the recount process should be crafted by GECOM and not CARICOM, but the legal luminaries are maintaining that CARICOM’s role as a supervisory body amounts to a breach of the Constitution and the Electoral Laws. Nonetheless, in iterating his commitment to the rule of law and the Constitution, President Granger said he respects the integrity and autonomous nature of the Elections Commission, and will abide with its declarations and the rulings of the Court. He said in the absence of such declarations, GECOM must be allowed to do its work as it seeks to bring the electoral process to an end. The Head of State was keen on noting, however, that the General and Regional Elections were conducted peacefully and in accordance with the Constitution and Laws of Guyana on March 2, 2020, but the events that followed it thereafter marred the excellent work of the Elections Commission.

“Confusion ensued at the Office of the Returning Officer for District Four in the wee hours of Wednesday, 4th March 2020, as a result of an invasion of the premises by political elements. Statements following the events of 4th March by the observer missions also created uncertainty in the minds of the citizenry. The Opposition People’s Progressive Party (PPP) so far approached the Supreme Court on three separate occasions to obstruct the work of the Elections Commission,” President Granger summarised. He said those actions coupled with the calls for recount, allowed for the Supreme Court to determine the way forward.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_03_18_2020