THE Government of Guyana has flayed what it described as a “flagrantly” biased editorial in Saturday’s edition of the Stabroek News.

The editorial titled ‘Mr. Granger and the elections’, is pointedly misleading and is estranged from the facts and riddled with reckless and outlandish conclusions which have no basis in reality.

FULL STATEMENT BELOW
The Honourable Chief Justice ordered thusly in her ruling of Thursday March 11, 2020: “[I]t would be for the Returning Officer and the Deputy Returning Officer to decide whether to restart or continue the process. It is their decision to make. And I would also repeat here it would be their decision to decide what is the best method for tabulating the Statements of Poll. So, I want to emphasise that everybody else who thinks they can have an input and a say it is not their statutory duty.”

The Chief Justice could not have been more explicit in her ruling. Stabroek News appears to have skirted over this most carefully precise declaration by the Chief Justice. Further, what Stabroek News did not mention in its clearly-biased and malicious editorial was that the revered independence of the Guyana Elections Commission is sacrosanct and rigidly and robustly safeguarded by the Constitution. It is insulated from political influence, instruction and interference. The Constitution at Article 62 charges the Commission with the conduct of elections. It states: “Elections shall be independently supervised by the Elections Commission in accordance with the provisions of Article 162.”

The Constitution at 162 (1) (a) mandates that the commission: “…shall exercise general direction and supervision over the registration of electors and the administrative conduct of all elections of members of the National Assembly….”
Unlike Stabroek News’ insinuation, the Commission must be allowed and was allowed by President David Granger and the Executive to function independently. President Granger did not seek to influence, interfere or instruct in any form whatsoever. To do so would have been a breach of the Constitution.

On March 9, in an address to the nation, President Granger was clear when he said: “At all times, I have acted in accordance with the Constitution and Laws of Guyana. After the elections on March 2, the nation awaited the declaration of the results by the elections commission after completing its work. GECOM is an independent constitutional agency over which I and the Executive have no control. I assure you, that as President, I cannot, did not and will not interfere in the work of GECOM.” The government, since the passage of the no-confidence motion in the National Assembly on December21, 2018, sought to respect the decision of the court. As was the government’s right and guided by the Speaker of the National Assembly, the validity of the no-c0nfidence motion was challenged. The government defended the challenge to the constitutionality of the appointment of the chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission.

The legal processes which were initiated were neither frivolous nor calculated to delay the consequences of the no-confidence vote. In fact, they sought to explain more clearly and to interpret certain provisions of the Constitution. The legal challenges were taken to the Supreme Court, then to the Court of Appeal and, finally, to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), Guyana’s final court. The CCJ on June 18, 2019, decoded that the most sensible approach to appointing the chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission was for the leader of the opposition and the President to communicate with each other, in good faith, and to discuss eligible candidates for the position before the formal submission of a list.

The President and the leader of the opposition met on July 4, 2019. On July 26, the President received, from the leader of the opposition, six names not unacceptable to him and on that same day Justice Claudette Singh was chosen from that list. On September 19, 2019, Justice Singh advised President Granger of the elections commission’s preparedness to hold elections by the end of February 2020.

On September 25, 2019, March 2, 2020 (the first Monday in March) was announced as Elections Day in Guyana. Due process and the rule of law and all constitutional provisions were dutifully adhered to. Where the court ruled, such rulings were scrupulously followed without deviation or delay. Stabroek News’ editorial seeks to enhance the carefully-crafted opposition narrative of foul play, when in fact, none such exists and all indications are that it is they, the opposition, in concert with their foreign agents who have been busy concocting and executing schemes designed to delay the electoral process and derail democracy in Guyana. The Government of Guyana rejects, in total, the biased Stabroek News editorial and calls on all Guyanese to be cognisant of Stabroek News’ obvious agenda of engendering destabilisation, discord and disenchantment.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_3-15-2020

THE Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) will be meeting with officials of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) to hammer out the modalities for a national recount of the ballots for the country’s administrative regions following the 2020 Regional and General Elections held two Mondays ago.

The commission met on Saturday afternoon to discuss the issue of recounting after several political parties called for a recount of the ballots for the contentious Region Four.

However, some members of the commission were unaware that a CARICOM-brokered decision was made in which President David Granger and Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo, agreed for a recount of the ballots for each region. During a court hearing on Saturday morning in which the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) sought to block the declaration of results for the elections, the High Court, which was shifted to the Diamond Magistrate’s Court following a fumigation exercise, heard that a statement was released by the Chair of CARICOM on the issue of recounting.

The statement was released by CARICOM’s chair, Mia Mottley, in which she noted that at the urging of President Granger, an agreement was reached between President Granger and Jagdeo for a recount of the ballots for Region Four. The CARICOM Secretariat later confirmed that the ballots for all the regions would be recounted.

On Saturday afternoon, Government-appointed commissioners of GECOM told reporters that they were still in the dark regarding the statement from CARICOM. It was argued that the two leaders had no statutory authority over the commission.

Later, on Saturday evening, Commissioner Vincent Alexander told reporters that the proposition for a national recount was brought to GECOM for consideration and he noted that the commission was awaiting further clarification from CARICOM on the matter. He said the matter becomes a question for the commission to give consideration to a recount in the context of the controversies which have arisen thus far.

He said initially, when the communication was made by CARICOM, only Region Four seemed under contention. He said the next step would be to clarify and finalsie a decision and make that decision operational. The commission will meet again as soon as the clarification is made by CARICOM.

Opposition-appointed commissioner, Sase Gunraj, noted that the statement from CARICOM was made available on Saturday morning while he was in court. He said it was brought to the attention of the court and there was some difficulty in ascertaining its authenticity. Its merit was later confirmed by the Office of the CARICOM Secretary General.

He said at the meeting on Saturday night at GECOM, there was contention about the statement’s intent. Gunraj said what is agreed to is that the commission will meet with the representatives of CARICOM and the delegation which the body identified.
Earlier on Saturday, the PPP/C made an application to the court seeking to block the declaration of the final results of the 2020 elections.

GECOM’s lawyer, Neil Boston, told reporters outside the Diamond Magistrate’s Court that he and his legal team were unaware of the move by the PPP/C to approach the courts. He said no information was served on his legal team as the respondents in the injunction filed. “We were not supposed to be here, we were misled, we thought we were supposed to be here,” he said.

He said PPP/C candidate, Charles Ramson, through an injunction filed by Nandlall, sought to restrain GECOM from making a final declaration based on the summary of results for Region Four. The tabulations for that region were made on Friday night.

Boston said that the court made it clear that “there is no evidence from this, on which an injunction should be granted,” he said. The matter was deferred to Monday.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_3-15-2020

Dear editor,
AS a kid brought up in a deprived community, one of the cardinal rules I’ve learnt is that one should never flaunt one’s wealth in public, since in so doing one may draw the wrong attention to oneself. Events of the last 12 days have caused me to reflect on what was inculcated in most of my compatriots and myself. It is this childhood knowledge I would use to rationalise recent events in Guyana.

Guyana post-independence history has always been one of troubles and conflicts. As a matter of fact, this is not unique to Guyana, for the British by a process of colonisation exploited our wealth. We in the Caribbean served to build, feed and enrich their empire while we the toiling locals received minimal returns for our hard labour. Post-World War II, Britain was in significant economic, infrastructural and human resource difficulties. As a result, they looked to the workforce in the Caribbean to assist the rebuilding process of Britain, which was destroyed by war.

Soon after, it became evident to the British that the economic benefits of the colonies were on the decline. As a result, Britain went on a journey of relieving themselves of that economic deadweight. The fact after years of being robbed of its resources, the colonies were not well developed since most of the wealth went to the British Empire. Also because of the actions of the British, whether intentionally or unintentionally, there was mistrust between the major races in Guyana. In the eyes of the Empire we were no longer of benefit to them, hence no longer their problem.

And so it would be for over half a decade. The mistrust between the major two races continued and would become more evident around the time of elections. Some politicians who were shortsighted would use it for their political gains and cared less about the post-election problems. I would never fool myself to believe that any political party was solely at fault. What I will say is that they were problems during PNC’s 28 years in power. These problems were mostly economic in nature for the PNC government ventured on self-provision policy that was not clearly articulated to the masses. As a result, the intent was misinterpreted and misunderstood with the inevitable result of a division along racial lines. On the other hand, the PPP’s problems over their 23 years in government were crime, the narco-trade, corruption and extra-judicial killings. These were thoroughly ventilated during the election campaign, so there is no need to rehash them. Suffice to say that after over 1000 extra-judicial killings, the only action taken by the ABCE countries was to confiscate the visa of Ronald Gajraj, the then Home Affairs Minister, since he was linked with the phantom murderous squad. And that was it. No other intervention required by the ABCE countries, at least that is what they want us to believe.

So now Guyana is experiencing troubles, which are not new, but now the international community is suddenly aware that Guyana exists. We had a similar electoral problem in 1997 when the then presidential candidate, Mrs.Janet Jagan, threw the court injunction over her shoulder. I am quite sure at that time that we had diplomatic relations with the ABCE countries, but they were all silent. We have had murders, rampant drugs, rampant corruption, and post-election conflicts among others, but the ABCE countries were silent. So why are they so vocal now? Why the sudden interest in Guyana? What has changed?
What has changed is that we now have oil. We see the actions of the ABCE countries when they wish to have that country’s resources. They create a crisis for which they invade and destabilise those countries in their desperation for oil. The key is to make the country ungovernable, exactly what they are doing to us. Forget about this garbage of democracy, much worse has happened and they cared less. The point is that the volume and quality of the oil in Guyana can significantly influence oil prices. That would be a serious concern for the ABCE countries since they would like to be in control of that because it can impact their economies.

As a result, the ABCE countries would rather have their puppet in charge. That puppet would be Bharrat Jagdeo and he will be the one under the control of the ABCE. Why? It is likely that the ABCE countries have a thick, damaging and incriminating file on Bharrat Jagdeo years in and out of office. These puppeteering files would be used as control strings over his head to control him and Guyana’s oil. They cannot do that for Mr. David Granger since no such file exists. That is exactly what is playing out in front of your very eyes as you see the ABCE ambassadors stumble over each other to make a supportive case for the PPP. The fact is that through greed, Bharrat Jagdeo was just using the PPP electorate to get his hands on power, a control of Guyana’s oil which he will pass on to the ABCE countries.
Guyana was exploited during colonisation. We were robbed of our sugar. We were robbed of our rice. We were robbed of our bauxite. We were robbed of our gold. The fact is that we are still living in abject poverty while those countries that exploited us are living in wealth, while demanding visas for us to enter the countries our sweat built. We as a people need to wake up.

The ABCE countries don’t care about you. The ABCE countries don’t like you. Don’t believe for a minute that they are with me. Disregard their concerns about democracy, that is an excuse to distract you as they siphon off your oil. They had also said that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction before they changed the narrative that he was involved in 9/11. That’s them! For decades they ignored us and our problems but now turn up because they wish to have their puppet in charge. No, it is not going to happen. You have stolen enough from us. Leave us with our oil so that we can develop as a country. We don’t need your assistance to solve our problems. We can solve our own problems that you have created. We are One people, One Nation, with One destiny. We as a people will build our nation and determine our destiny.

Regards
Dr. Mark Devonish

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_3-15-2020

IN Guyana we have grown up within a democratic culture that emphasizes the ballots, not bullets, to resolve political disputes. With the potential for untold wealth from oil revenues at our door-steps, we must spare this nation from the wounds of civil conflicts, violence and insurrection.

For those of us who are old enough to remember the bloody 1960s, we do not want again to see internal strife and foreign interference tearing our people apart. For those who have not lived in that tragic period I suggest that you read The West on Trial. In it Dr. Cheddi Jagan referred to the expose by an Insight Team which was published by the Sunday Times. His removal, the report said, did not cost much – 250,000 pounds sterling. “For the colony, British Guiana, the result was about 170 dead, untold hundreds wounded, roughly 10 million pounds-worth of damage to the economy and a legacy of racial bitterness.” (Harpy, 2004, p 380)

RAW EDGE
Once again, after over 50 years of being independent, Guyana is on the raw edge as we await final results of elections that were held since March 2. This would be the first time that the results have taken so long to be declared and, today, being March 15, we are cautioned to beware the Ides of March.

On Friday evening when tabulation of votes from the last district was successfully completed and the results announced, we thought we would get the overall final results within hours. But new legal manoeuvres were introduced to block the Chief Elections Officer (CEO) from making the final declaration. Several of the contesting parties demanded a recount of the ballots cast in Region 4.

This is a matter for the court to decide, unless the Chairman of GECOM conceded that this is the way to go. I understand that the Chairman has extended an invitation to CARICOM to supervise the recount process, a move that received the support of both the President and the Opposition Leader. The ruling APNU+AFC has already signaled that it wanted a recount of ballots in the remaining nine districts.

CARIBBEAN FAMILY
It is a great strategic move to involve CARICOM and repose confidence in it as our foremost Caribbean institution. Others are trying to push out CARICOM, and to literally invade our backyard. No way!

After the 1997 elections, we had a similar “family” intervention from CARICOM when Trinidad’s former Judge Ulric Cross was dispatched to oversee a forensic audit of votes. Though the Cross findings identified discrepancies in balloting, it was the court presided over by then Justice Claudette Singh that deemed the results null and void. But by then Mrs Janet Jagan was sworn in as the President, and she could not be removed after the recount.

I was in the thick of things back then, and cooperated with CARICOM’s eminent team of Wise Men headed by Sir Henry Forde, former Attorney General of Barbados. The team brokered an agreement that shaved two years off the term of President Janet Jagan, and set a timeframe for new elections after completion of certain reforms to the Guyana Constitution.

I was present at her Bel Air house when Mrs. Jagan signed along the dotted line, and when elements of the party’s extremist fringe turned on Ralph Ramkarran, then PPP Executive and legal tzar. I still vividly remember the bitter onslaught that was unjustifiably unleashed against him for allegedly selling out to the Wise Men.

So recounts could have unsettling outcomes by which democrats have to live. They must agree a priori to accept the results as this would help to open the door to restore trust amongst political players, and defuse any possibility for outsiders to cash in on our seeming division. While it is laudable that both the President and the Leader of the Opposition have agreed to the recount, it must not appear that this is driven by the Executive. It is GECOM that is running the show, and has to implement the recount process. It must be clearly understood by those who are threatening sanctions, and those who are inviting foreign intervention, that constitutionally, GECOM is in charge of the conduct of elections – from registration of electors to declaration of the final results.

So when we thought that it was over on Friday last, we still have another round or two to go. The ballot boxes may have stunning revelations. But they would bury all doubts, and would restore credibility to our electoral processes. Its credibility has been tarnished when the PPP boasted that it had won the 2020 elections by leaking fake results, and promoted violence. That unlawful disclosure initially fed the insatiable appetite of certain known vested interests and their surrogates to impugn and discredit our sovereign institutions.

LAYERS OF TRANSPARENCY
Then, after bouts of delays and disruptions, GECOM officials implemented several layers of transparency, as it tried to comply with Orders of the Court. It revealed the votes for various contenders from a spreadsheet then, from individual statements of polls that were projected on a big screen for all party representatives and observers to see. The opposing parties rejected both of those exercises.

When the Region 4 results were declared, for the second time, they validated expectations that the APNU+AFC Coalition had won in Region 4, and has an overall lead by about 7,000 votes. But the race was not over. Now, we have to “hold all bets” and wait on the recount. In the meantime, it is hoped that the political tensions would subside, as our people affirm faith in the Guyana Elections Commission and renew trust in the Caribbean Community. In the end, the results may be ugly to some. But that would be our baby – the baby that our Constitution delivers.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_3-15-2020

THE last two weeks have been quite a lesson for Guyana. It was plain for all who cared to pay attention that there was a well-orchestrated plot to subvert the democratic process in our country, while pretending to protect democracy. We have witnessed this storyline over and over for the last three decades. People use democracy as a mask to hide their nefarious intentions and actions.

For the better part of 23 years the top leadership of a major political party paraded as agents of democratic restoration, while using their access to power to transform the State into a medium of economic criminality, ethnic domination and extra-judicial killings. By the time rescue came via the ballot box five years ago, Guyana had reached the brink of a failed state.

After a mere four years of repair work, an unwarranted attack was launched to thwart the desire of the majority of Guyanese to renew the mandate of the repairers. It all began on December 20, 2019, when with the aid of a disgruntled coalition backbencher, a brazen attempt was made to seize power through the back door in the form of a no-confidence motion. It was an act that came like a thief in the night as Guyanese prepared for the festive season. What followed was a year of legal and extra-legal manipulation masquerading as democratisation. It took all the resolve of the Guyanese and the tenacity of their elected leaders to defend the democratically elected government of the day.

Having failed to unconstitutionally dislodge the government, the plotters set their sights on the 2020 elections. They telegraphed their intentions by introducing the narrative of rigged elections long before the first ballot was cast. But even as they tried to spread that falsehood, they were engaged in the actual attempts to rig the system. They did everything in their power to go to the elections with a tainted voters’ list. Every attempt by GECOM to sanitise the list, including a brand-new house-to-house registration was disrupted. In the end the final voters list, despite some degree of sanitisation, left some room for manipulation which from all reports was utilised by those who are currently shouting about democratic elections.

The brazen invasion of GECOM by gunmen attached to the major opposition party showed the extent to which that party is prepared to go to illegally seize power. The massing of their supporters in the public space resulted in violent attacks on schoolchildren and the security forces that were captured for the world to see. Eventually one citizen died as he openly attacked policemen and women who were dispatched to quell the directed uprisings. These uprisings from all indications were designed to not only attack those perceived to be supporters of the coalition, but to also provoke retaliation from adjoining communities. That these communities did not respond to taunts in that regard is a testimony to the restraint exercised by the coalition leadership.

What is most egregious about the plot as it unfolded was the seeming success of the plotters to enlist the support of some civil society organisations, which in turn appeared to have misled some of the international observer groups. We do not make a charge of direct collusion between the local anti-democratic plotters and the observer groups, but the apparent reluctance to call out the aggression of the local opposition is somewhat baffling. Further, the rush to judgement on the veracity of the elections is rather unfortunate to say the least. Such judgements in a highly volatile environment run against best practices as far as elections observation is concerned.

The move to the courts on two occasions, which was claimed to be done as judicial review, has turned out to be nothing more than disruptive tactics. The rulings of the court were not respected by the plotters as they did not aid their objectives. As was the case with the no-confidence motion, there were clear attempts to bully the court into granting consequential orders that would have usurped the power of an independent agency and in the process pave the way for the undemocratic seizure of power. The chief justice was adamant that the court would not be drawn into the plot.

The naked attempt to delegitimise GECOM is most shameful. We hold no brief for that agency, but given the tremendous pressure it has had to withstand from hostile actors, it deserved the full commendation of all decent-minded Guyanese. The attacks on the integrity of the Region Four Returning Officer and the GECOM Chair are unprecedented, even for a country that is accustomed to contentious elections. As we await the final declarations, we can expect more of the plot to unfold and more of the self-serving rhetoric of defence of democracy. But the masks are off, and the Guyanese people can see the real hijackers of democracy.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_3-15-2020

Dear Editor
I have no doubt that the results as declared reflect the will of the people. GECOM’s messy post-E-day performance in Region 4, however, has marred the coalition’s victory. As such, there should be no resistance to the calls for a recount. The coalition, I would advise, should even insist on one. It has nothing to lose and all to gain.

But, as the final store of God’s truth (a coalition win), the ballot boxes will soon come under attack by election losers and coalition loathers. In the coming days, expect to see more and more attempts to discredit these boxes. Allegations that the boxes have been tampered with will now be tossed around with reckless disregard. In this political high-stakes game, any lapse by GECOM during any recount would be jumped on as evidence of fraud. A recount, therefore, has to be absolutely flawless, a tightrope act.

While the law allows either a partial or a total recount, the situation demands no less than a total recount. For a recount to withstand the desperate attacks on its credibility, however, GECOM must, at minimum, take the following actions: (i) it will have to remove RO Mingo and any other controversial staff from any supervisory or operational role in the recounting process, (ii) it must ensure, through consultations with contesting parties, that all aspects of the recounting process are agreed on before any ballot box is touched, and (iii) before a full recount, GECOM should conduct a statistically-valid partial recount of 50 or so randomly-selected ballot boxes. In this, each contesting party should be allowed to pull from a bag the numbers of five polling stations. The counts from these stations should be compared with their SOPs. Using such a partial recount to verify the SOPs is critical for several reasons. It provides a dry run allowing kinks to be ironed out before a full recount. Also, the handling of a smaller number of boxes minimizes operational lapses and thus the opportunities for unfounded accusations. Lastly, this initial step allows the truth to steadily and irresistibly unfold. These three suggestions can do much to increase the acceptance, even grudgingly for some, of the 2020 election results.

From here on, GECOM must appreciate that mere compliance with the law would not be enough to restore maximum public confidence in its operations. It must take purposeful steps urgently to increase transparency and accountability. GECOM must, for example, publish all its SOPs now. In addition, it must speak, through the media, more often with the public.

As for the coalition, whose victory has been marred by the untidiness of it all, it can no longer afford a posture of “quiet obedience to the dictates of GECOM”, to quote its Thursday media release. Its deliberate aloofness has little strategic value and only leads to loss of political ground and to negative perceptions. It too must publicly express its expectations of GECOM. It too must demand a recount. It too must demand that GECOM get its act together.

Regards
Sherwood Lowe

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_3-15-2020

THE General Elections (Observers) Act provides stipulations for the presence of observers at elections. Section 3 (1) states that the President may, after consultation with the Chairman of the Elections Commission, invite persons from outside Guyana to visit Guyana for the purpose of observing the democratic processes of the State as enshrined in the Constitution, and more specifically, the conduct of any election. Subsection Two states that the name of any person so invited shall be published in the Gazette and he shall be issued with an identity card by the Chairman of the Elections Commission.

Section 4 (1) and (2) confer the rights of the observers. Subsection 1 states that “an observer may scrutinise the official list of electors, enter polling places and places appointed for the counting of votes, and seek information from the Chairman of the Elections Commission, the Chief Elections Officer and other election officers. Subsection 2 states that “An observer shall have the right to obtain from the Chairman of the Elections Commission, a copy of the official list of electors from one or more polling divisions and of any written law governing or regulating any election.” Finally, subsection 3 states that “The Chairman of the Elections Commission, the Chief Elections Officer and other election officers, shall comply with any reasonable request made by the observers in the performance of their functions.

The recent March 2 Regional and General Elections opened up Guyana’s democracy to intense international scrutiny. Under the microscope of the ABCE countries, The European Union, the Organisation of American States, CARICOM, the Commonwealth and The Carter Center. The local observation groups included the Guyana Public Service Union, Ebenezer Congregational Church Foundation, AMCHAM Guyana, Private Sector Commission, Georgetown Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Canadian High Commission, Cuffy 250, The Bar Association, Transparency Institute Guyana, US Embassy, British High Commission, Ethnic Relations Commission and Youth Challenge Guyana. In total, there were 18 international and local observer groups who “observed” Guyana’s most hotly-contested elections.

As polls closed on Monday 2 March, the day seemed to have gone off rather successfully. There were no major reports of electors having any difficultly in being able to cast their votes at the 2339 polling stations in the 10 electoral districts in Guyana. Following the close of polls, there were a number of conferences convened by Observer Groups where they stated their opinion on what they had observed throughout the day. Their comments were largely in the positive and some brief recommendations for electronic voting and changes to electoral laws were made. Their preliminary conclusions, at that point, were that elections had gone well and were ‘free’ and ‘fair’.

By Wednesday 4th and Thursday 5th March, counting and declaration had been completed in all Regions, save for Region Four, the most populous electoral district. After the invasion of the Guyana Elections Commission on the night and morning of those days, the subsequent declaration of the Region Four results on Thursday, March 5 by GECOM was blocked by an injunction filed by the opposition People’s Progressive Party Civic. As proverbial and literal hell broke loose at GECOM, confusion began to spread and it was at that point that ill-timed, ill-informed and potentially incendiary comments were made by several observer groups.

As events continued to unfold at breakneck speed over the last week, there have been numerous press conferences, comments and statements issued by many observer groups. In general, there is a strong message being sent that Guyana must comply with its constitutional obligations to provide free, fair and credible elections. That being said, the privilege of being invited into our sovereign nation and being allowed to observe our internal processes is exactly that, a privilege. Without understanding the intricate complexities of Guyanese politics, one might easily do more harm than good when commenting on matters with which one is unfamiliar. Guyanese, more than anyone else involved, want the democratic process to be concluded and a duly-elected leader sworn in after a fair and transparent elections process.

Although Guyana is a young democracy, right-minded Guyanese are more than capable of creating and instituting laws, systems, processes and other reformative actions for the betterment of the system and the people of Guyana. Following the barrage of strongly-worded statements released by observer groups in recent days, Guyanese are now questioning whether their presence has actually helped or hindered us as we sought to exercise our democratic right and undertake our constitutional obligations. What’s more, the elevated status attributed to these groups by some local observer groups and citizens is most disappointing. It is frightening that some would allow the Guyanese narrative to be dictated by outside organisations and the ABCE band of nations who are already deeply involved in Guyana’s politics and who have their own vested interests in the manifestation of certain outcomes in Guyana.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_3-14-2020 

Dear Editor,
May I remind all of us that slavery and indentured servitude ended as recently 70 years ago in Guyana.  Our people were brought to the shores of this country we now call Guyana by the ancestors of the very international observers who are now trying their best to foster instability by meddling in our electoral process using partisan postures and language.

It is said that the governments of former colonial powers have no friends, just interests.  If we stopped to consider the war in Iraq, Afghanistan, Grenada, the colonisation of Africa, India, Central, South and Latin America and other places where the European and North American governments supported a political regime and regime change, only to subvert and overthrow said regime.

This is after empowering the regime with finances, weapons and other resources working to fuel societal instability by widening the gap between the rich and impoverished, fuelling discord between social groups much like they are attempting to do right now in Guyana between supporters of the coalition and Peoples Progressive Party.  These said powers then used the instability they helped create as the basis for their governments to say we need to stop this, let us intervene, we are here to save you.

My Guyanese people, Guyana is a powerful nation. More powerful than we have ever been in the entire history of this country.  Our petroleum wealth not only means improved living standards for our people, but it also means that we are now one of the most powerful and influential nations anywhere in the world. Because of the vast wealth associated with our petroleum resources, we can significantly influence the international financial markets, geopolitical decision-making, the global economy, and the international petroleum industry.  We can easily influence the price of crude oil for example.
Regardless of the political party you support, I call on you to support ONE GUYANA!

Regards,
R. Small

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_3-14-2020 

Dear Editor,

I’VE been watching the PPP’s attacks on the female head of GECOM, shortly after her appointment! I’ve written several letters to the press, prior to the elections, which highlighted this fact! I believe the objective of the PPP was to project Madame Justice Claudette Singh as incompetent and incapable of carrying out the functions of her office.

I exposed this plot a while now! However, the attacks were ramped up to the maximum last Thursday when the PPP and their friends invaded GECOM. The PPP hoped that by creating the chaos at GECOM’s office, last week, their narrative would be perfectly completed. So, they stormed GECOM’S office, kicked on the door of the chairperson, created a ruckus and some even made threatening remarks. Clearly, the chairperson’s security was compromised.

This is not normal behavior! This is not regular political protest! This was a continuing and elevated attack on a woman in authority! Earlier, I called out these attacks as sexist, as I have never seen such attacks perpetrated against any of the men who once chaired GECOM! I strongly denounce the PPP attack on Justice Claudette Singh and urge all right-thinking Guyanese to do so.

Where are the many women’s organisations! This is not a political issue, it is an issue of open bigotry and sexism! I am appalled that to date, there has not been sufficient forceful condemnation of the actions by those who continue to engage in these dastardly attacks that put the life of Justice Claudette Singh at risk! Where are the usually vociferous ones; PSC, ABC, etal! I am disgusted! We speak of equality and women’s rights but yet, watch in silence, or seem to be complicit as the hate and venom of some are unleashed against a woman! I don’t know Justice Claudette Singh, I’ve never met her but I feel compelled to speak up on her behalf.

I also call on the Ethnic Relations Commission to monitor the actions of the attackers, whose actions I deem highly intimidating. I applaud Justice Singh for her strength and fortitude, she refuses to bend to the pressures, insults and assault unleashed by men and their female gang members! This is a sad reality, a reality I have been pointing out for too long now! Last week it has come full circle! There has to be a more civil way to express disagreement! In 1997 when the said Justice Claudette Singh ruled in the elections petition and allowed the very PPP to remain in office after those elections were declared null and void, the PPP did not treat her this way. They were celebrating the fact that the “Doctrine of Necessity” was employed. What do they expect from Justice Singh today!

I pray good sense prevail.

Regards
Lurlene Nestor

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_3-14-2020

….says these bodies have shown contempt tor CJ’s ruling and GECOM

THE Guyana Trades Union Congress (GTUC) said it is deeply concerned by the statement made by Mr. Alexander Matus, Deputy Head of the European Union (EU) Observers Mission, de­manding that District Four Returning Officer of the Guyana Elections Com­mission (GECOM), band over legal documents (Statements of Poll) to him. 

In a strongly-worded statement, the GTUC reminds Mr. Matus that the Co­operative Republic of Guyana is a sover­eign nation and the relationship between Guyana and the EU is one governed by diplomatic engagement under the Gene­va Conventions. The union added that GECOM is an autonomous constitutional body, solely responsible for general, re­gional and local elections in Guyana. 

According to the GTUC, on March 11, 2020, the High Court of Guyana ruled reinforcing GECOM’s independence and reminded all that observers, domestic and international, have no statutory right over GECOM as an entity and any of its officers with particular reference to the returning officer who is not answerable to forces external to GECOM. “The boldness of Mr. Matus’ contempt for the Constitution and Laws of Guyana, the ruling of the High Court, and people of Guyana places his goodwill and agenda into question. It raises questions regard­ing d1e continued role and ability of certain international organisations/countries or more particularly, their representatives entrusted to observe and report on the Guyana elections into question.” “Mr. Matus and others who have communicated with similar impropriety know their limitations in a sovereign nation forbid them interfering, much less dictating to and demanding from our institutions of governance. Being an invited observer and having an interest in our electoral processes does not provide him or any other additional privileges to interfere,” GTUC said. 

According to the GTUC, opportunity is taken to bring to the attention of Assistant Secretary (ag) for U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, Mr. Michael Kozak, that the Guyana elections has not yet been pronounced on by GECOM which is the statutory body vested with the authority to so do. The union said Guyanese are mindful that the Western World has had and in some instances are, undergoing similar challenges which were resolved with due process and without external interference. As a small developing sovereign nation, we ask for and are entitled to no less. 

“We also ask for some respect be accorded to our CARICOM relationship since said body bas demonstrated a respectful oversight interest,” the statement concluded.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_3-14-2020