Dear Editor,
I REFER to “Top Cop rebuffs KN story”, in the Guyana Chronicle of June 03, 2020. For the Kaieteur News, a print media that, since May 2015, has been an unabashed mouthpiece of an undemocratic and well-documented criminal state political party, to accuse the Commissioner of Police of sending false information to the Guyana Elections Commission, outlines a disrespect for such an office, and a reckless disregard for attempts of seeking the truth.

But first of all, the Commissioner must be congratulated for the urgency with which he has treated with the GECOM’S request, since it concerns a matter of extreme importance to the national interest, the March 02, regional and general elections; and secondly, for his prompt response to what is clearly another attempt by this muckraker and shameless stranger to the truth print, to bring into disrepute, not only the Coalition’s well-documented evidence of absent Guyanese casting ballots on March 2, but also the Elections Commission into disrepute. One could have predicted this latest foul attack coming from a newsprint which now wallows in yellow putridity. No wonder it had been categorised as a muckraker in a senior diplomatic dispatch some years ago.

It is an absurdity, that in the face of insurmountable evidence of electoral fraud, and with the GECOM having the vested authority to investigate such instances, granted in accordance with Article 162 of the Constitution, from which authority the Gazzetted Recount flows, that such a brazen attempt is mounted via a pathetic mouthpiece to bring the entire forensic process into disrepute. Surely, the eminent Editor, Adam Harris, had every right to exit such a filthy political media cesspool.

Reading the Kaieteur News story, it reeks of that familiar air of political corruption of the highest kind, for it is an attempt to cast similar aspersions on the Commissioner of Police for doing his duty in his constitutional discharge of supplying information on a very critical issue of national import. KN must be reminded that any such information requested from such a State institution responsible for such records, that there must be a response forthcoming, particularly to a request emanating from a constitutional organ as the GECOM.

Each day, it is appalling to observe that the media, which is said to be the public’s watch-dog, its pro-opposition segments, continues to be deliberate in the opposite direction of truth, as it aids and abets the opposition PPP/C in its vicious assault on the truth, as is clearly the instance in this extant matter where the credibility of the Commissioner of Police is being attacked.

It cannot be normal in any society for the truth not to be SOUGHT, or those opposed to such a search continue to use various subterfuge to impede its revelation. It cannot be normal either for truth to continuously be made a football, to be kicked in those dark directions so as to conceal its contents. It can only occur in a country in which anti-democratic forces abound, inclusive of those who thirst for political power at all costs, and who have managed to undermine the democratic process in a variety of ways, as has ever since become known.

It even becomes a national tragedy, of epic proportions, when the vested interest media, continues to aid and abet such a dangerous endeavour. It brings one to the perennial question, not really needed to be asked, but should be repeated, why are these dark forces, inclusive of the KN and its kindred rabble types, so bent on obfuscating and discrediting the current process of recount that was initiated to ascertain the credibility of the March 02, electoral process? Obviously, the answer is FEAR OF BEING DISCOVERED, OF BEING FOUND OUT, FOR THE ELECTORAL CRIMINALITY PERPETRATED ON THE NATION’S ELECTORAL PROCESS, BY ITS POLITICAL CARD. And the KN is a significant part and parcel of these crooked attempts at deceiving the nation. All AND SUNDRY MUST BE REMINDED, INCLUSIVE OF THE KN THAT THE TRUTH IS ONLY FEARED WHEN IT BRINGS TO LIGHT ITS ENEMIES.

Regards,
Troy Garraway

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_06_06_2020

Dear Editor,
IN an article written by me and published in the Stabroek News dated 3rd June, 2020 and captioned “Recount is not about simple numbers but a more complex and complete evaluation,” I presented factual evidence to buttress the claim as captured in the headline of said letter in response to the effrontery of the European Union Ambassador Fernando Ponz Canto suggesting, in spite of the very glaring evidence of electoral fraud and corruption discovered in every region, that “it was impossible to cheat”.

It was disappointing after presenting irrefutable evidence extracted from an easily accessible public document found on the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) website, outlining the legal defining characteristics of the recount that I was forced to respond to a misleading editorial commentary to reiterate, “The gazetted Order of 4th May, 2020 speaks to a National Recount, and this specifies areas of particular focus for review. It is not your call, my call, or any other but GECOM to stipulate at this point (or at any point) what the recount focus is, and what, therefore, must be reported on. Clearly, this key issue has been missed. Efforts by many to misrepresent the Recount is noted.” (3rd June).

The foregoing comment was made in response to the misleading “Editor-in-Chief’s note: The so-called anomalies raised by APNU+AFC agents in these observation reports have no basis. They are fishing expeditions. One of the most egregious claims by APNU+AFC was the supposed non-stamping of the ballots of the Disciplined Services which Mr. Lewis interestingly avoids mentioning. This is a recount, not an audit, or an election petition. The GECOM Chair is duty-bound to declare the recount result, and to do so expeditiously.”

This seemingly simple editorial note is an act of suppression; it is misleading, and an attempt not to acknowledge the very profound aspects of the Order that determine the nature of the recount, designed and agreed to by GECOM as a means of ascertaining credibility. The readership is reminded that it was Anil Nandlall, former PPP/C Attorney-General, who opined that “fraud, once committed, makes everything a nullity…ab initio”. The Opposition having agreed to the specifics of the Order is now changing its voice, and so are those specific international agents whom we must now call international dictators espousing a vulgar diplomacy.

The editor and the newspaper were wrong; not wrong to editorialise, for that is the prerogative of ownership, but wrong in their use of editorial power to misrepresent public information. In so doing, they fool a large cross-section of the Guyanese community and world at large. I submit that this is not accidental; it represents glaring support of an organised campaign to discredit certain views, and the persons who make them, thus making them less than credible in the eyes of the reading public.

It sets out the pillars of destabilisation of the truth of the 2020 Elections and the recount which the Opposition and international dictators are seeking to use as a foundation for clandestine machinations at regime change by any means necessary. I again remind readers of the Organisation of American States (OAS)’s role in the Bolivia story, and what is taking place politically in the countries that form the Guianas oil basin. Venezuela, Guyana, and most recently, the exposure of OAS ignorance and/or disregard for Surinamese laws.

There is an organised effort by several actors in and out of Guyana who speak from the same script, to present an impression of many sources, in support of the Opposition and denouncing GECOM. It is not lost on a large section of the Guyanese community that there is a political warfare being waged among the contesting parties of the 2020 elections. It is also obvious that some mainstream media have formed an alliance to influence domestic and international understanding of Guyana’s politics and electoral reality. There is serious concern about said role in these delicate times. Only time will tell the fruit Guyana will reap from what has been sowed.

Regards,
Lincoln Lewis

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_06_06_2020

Dear Editor,
IF power-sharing in government is being contemplated at this time, I hope that commonsense and good sense will prevail and expose the folly, in all its aspects, of such a disastrous proposal and plan which is embodied and clothed with catastrophic consequences.

Examining historical data of governance for the 23 years prior to May 2015 clearly indicates that a particular political party should not be included in its present form, unless it cleans up its act. However, recent events that expose massive voter fraud in the current Recount Exercise that was Gazetted on May 4, 2020, point to that particular political party as the perpetrators.

Now, let the progress continue with the just over four year’s success story that Guyana was enjoying under the steady hand of President Granger and his APNU/AFC Coalition Government. Do not spoil it now with a lapse of foresight and positive thinking and sabotage the unprecedented progress that Guyana enjoyed with its transformation from being a Pariah State internationally, and where Guyanese began to enjoy the GOOD LIFE in such a short time. Changing course at this crucial time will be an incorrigible mistake, and place an irrefutable curse on the perpetrators of such an irreconcilable misstep.

However, I feel that House-To-House (HTH) Registration will be recommended and mandated by GECOM after determining that Guyana Elections 2020 are NOT Credible, due to the massive voter fraud encountered in the Forensic Recount of the ballots in the ballot boxes in all the Ten (10) Regions.

A CREDIBLE List OF Electors will then be prepared from the HTH Registration exercise, necessitating Credible Elections as soon as practicably possible.

It is hoped that during this time, all political parties will clean up their act, purify their body politic, and choose worthy participants who would qualify to participate in power-sharing in Government. Not now, then might be the appropriate time for discussing and introducing Inclusive Governance if, for ‘Christ’s sake’, the political parties ever agree to such a forward step that the President says is embodied in the Guyana Constitution. The correct timing of such an event is crucial and of utmost importance to the honest and long-term development of Guyana, particularly in Guyana’s current oil age.

Sincerely,
Thomas Saunders

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_06_06_2020

Dear Editor,
IN medicine, a patient would relate his/her symptoms to a doctor before any attempt at a diagnosis is made; and, most of the time, after tests are done, the doctor is able to make a diagnosis. Thereafter, treatment is administered, as in the case of cancer, to get to the source of the problem. In other words, treatment is given, not directly to the symptoms presented, but to the root of the underlying disease.

Guyana is in the throes of a colossal political mess, unparalleled in the annals of electioneering, a solution for which not even the international observers and foreign missions, including the US and Canadian Ambassadors, to name just two, have so far been able to influence. The ruling ‘caretaker’ government seems to have no qualms as they brazenly thumb their noses at all but their own activists, apologists, and radical political base.

A recount has been in progress for a month, despite a total vote count of around a mere half million, and following it for most of us is like watching grass grow! And every day comes with new communiques by the ruling party, not the least of which have been wild accusations of fraud at polling stations, including voting by people who allegedly had left the country, and ‘statistical anomalies,’ though the numbers of votes involved in these trumped-up claims are just infinitesimal to even come close to affect the final outcome.
While the entire country, diaspora, and the world watch as the recount ‘progresses,’ the ruling party, with the backing of the Armed Forces, lopsidedly staffed by its own supporters, videos of which give the erroneous impression of a monoracial population, is giving no hint it is likely to compromise and respect the will of the electorate. In fact, all indications point to possible myriad court actions if the recount indicates they lost.

Also, even the GECOM Commissioner, an ex-judge, has been acting as if under orders from APNU headquarters. And it goes on and on, as the country’s affairs are on a protracted hold, and with no silver lining visible to buoy the hopes of decent-minded Guyanese and the world at large.

I am one who has always looked beyond party loyalty for a just solution to the problems plaguing the Guyanese people, and I have, in letters to the press over the years, long before March 2, 2020, given vent to my views. I’ve posited, inter alia, that the British, as they were washing their hands of the colonies in their vast empire, too often resorted to a divide-and-rule strategy, one that resulted in a deep schism between the two major races in Guyana, starting with the Jagan-Burnham split they engineered. History will attest that they left us with nothing but a quagmire, after changing the electoral system from First-Past-The-Post (incidentally, a system still used in the UK) to Proportional Representation, as a means of geting rid of Cheddi Jagan, consistent with the wishes of Forbes Burnham and Peter D’Aguiar, then leaders of the opposition parties. Of course, we all know how D’Aguiar was shoved to the sidelines while Burnham pursued policies that drove the country to near bankruptcy while fattening his personal coffers.

As we witness the intransigence of the APNU/AFC government, in defiance of all other stakeholders, including foreign missions and observers, it is of vital importance that we strive to get to the root of the problem giving rise to the present scenario. The rift orchestrated by our former colonial masters resulted in a marked division, with the two major races eyeing each other with distrust, and at the polls, East Indians supporting Cheddi Jagan, Afro-Guyanese, Forbes Burnham. It is this, the underlying problem, that rears its ugly head come election-time every five years.

Some on each side of the political spectrum would argue that their party has made significant inroads into the other’s political base, and that there is no longer that racial divide when it comes to voting. I posit that such an argument is simply specious; and I’d be happy to revisit my stance on this when, for example, at least ten per cent of Port Mourant support the PNC and ten per cent of Buxton support the PPP! The problem of a racial pattern of voting is alive and kicking, and it is too often exploited by politicians. This is the source of the quandary we face in Guyana today, and unless addressed with a bipartisan approach, it is likely to continue unchecked, cycle after election cycle.
Indeed, the barefaced electoral fraud being perpetrated today is of the most unconscionable and egregious nature. However, I submit, what is happening are merely symptoms of the underlying problem; the said ethnic schism bequeathed us by the British.

And part of the problem is that the clear losers of this election, the APNU/WPA coalition, cognizant of the skewed pattern of voting, and that consequently they are likely this time to be relegated to history unless the PPP/C engages in the type of reckless governance they were accused of prior to 2015, are not inclined to concede.

What we need to do is, as I’ve indicated in my opening analogy, address the root of the problem instead of concentrating on the symptoms. It’s a malignancy that’s been metastasising for too long, and is likely to lead to devastating results, unless partisanship is shelved and a rational approach is adopted. I repeat, what we are witnessing are symptoms of the underlying problem, and little, if any, headway is likely if we keep concentrating only on the symptoms.

I have, in previous letters, suggested some form of a national-unity government, under the watchful eyes of an oversight committee comprising of elderly statesmen, members of the clergy involving the major religions, and a few lay folks, and I’ve touched on some of the vast benefits likely to follow. I quote the relevant paragraph in my February 17, 2017 letter: “The benefits of a national-unity government can be legion.

A bipartisan approach can lead to a drastic improvement in the crime situation, including the scourge of break-in robberies that for too long have been plaguing business and home owners and posing a disincentive for the many overseas-based Guyanese intent on re-migrating. And, most important, a surge in the economy is to be expected, with an uptick in entrepreneurship both by locals and re-migrants, and the consequent job creation which is likely to ensue.” Obviously, with national unity, we can expect a win-win situation for all. But the greatest benefit to be derived would be a populace living in harmony, in the absence of political mudslinging and gridlock at all levels.

A travesty of electoral justice has been inflicted on the Guyanese people, and now three months later, we are still waiting for a declaration of the winner. With the widespread support of foreign observers and missions on the side of fairness and transparency, a final and just resolution is still possible. It is abundantly clear the PPP/C won on March 2, and they should be declared as such. I hope that with the swearing-in of a new government, the task of forging unity would be paramount.

Perhaps we can follow the example set by the great Nelson Mandela, who, after twenty-seven years of his life was stolen from him, emerged from prison with neither revenge nor rancor, but racial unity and harmony uppermost in his mind. Of course, we all know how he stood tall, stayed the course, and made his country a much better place for all South Africans. This is also possible in Guyana, recognized as home to one of the nicest and most hospitable peoples on earth; so, my fellow Guyanese, let’s wake up and strive for national unity – it’s about time!

Regards,
Abel Peters

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_06_06_2020

– GECOM meets today to discuss way forward

AT the end of Friday, 76 ballot boxes from the Demerara-Mahaica Region (Region Four) were processed, however, a number of those counted boxes were not tabulated due to the absence of important documents, and the commission’s decision is being awaited.

In fact, Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Commissioner Vincent Alexander, told the media that all the documents for some 21 boxes were missing. These boxes contained only ballots. This was an issue that was raised on Thursday by A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) executive member Joseph Harmon, and the very irregularity continued the following day.

This, Alexander said, is very strange, especially since they are coming in a cluster, and all seems to be in People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) strongholds.

“A significant number of boxes from Thursday into Friday were found with only ballots in their contents. The other documents, the Official List of Electors (OLE), the counterfoils, all those documents which [are] supposed to give information about who should have voted, are not in the box. This is strange, and what is even stranger is that it’s coming in a cluster. It’s not one far and in between. There are those who would argue there were similar instances prior, but I myself don’t recall a similar instance where absolutely nothing else other than ballots [is] in the box. Here we have this apparent cluster,” Alexander posited.

In addition to the cluster, coincidentally or not, all these boxes reflect exceedingly high figures for the PPP/C.
These boxes came from polling stations such as Montrose Primary School, People’s Assembly of God Church, LBI Primary School, Chateau Margot Primary School, and more.
Alexander said that the decision made,is to have the secretariat do an investigation into this matter, and to render a report before proceeding to making a determination in relation to the ballots.

The question of whether these ballots can be deemed invalid due to the absence of the documents is still to be determined by the commission, he noted further.

“There’s no reconciliation to what is in the boxes… But at the end of the day you cannot disenfranchise anyone because people must have voted and therefore the question that will have to be asked, is what happened, or how you can ensure these people have voted. The question to the people’s franchise has to be processed,” Alexander said.

The meeting is set for today to decide a way further on these boxes with missing documents and the immigration list, among other issues.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_06_06_2020

Dear Editor,
AS the recount process comes closer to completion, Mr. Frederick Kissoon is demonstrating that he is in a “deep” opposition conspiracy with elements supportive of the PPP/C to discredit and demonise GECOM’s Chair, Justice (Ret’d) Claudette Singh as they accuse her of collaboration with the government and the APNU+AFC to rig the elections, and now the recount process. His most recent attack on Madam Chairman Singh is contained in his June 2, 2020 KN column, captioned “Claudette Singh and deep-state conspiracy”.

Here are a few examples of Kissoon’s revolting abuse of Claudette Singh: – “… to explain the nasty, ugly connections between the police, GECOM, and the government to derail the 2020 election.”; – “ …there is a deep state conspiracy to rig the elections results. That has been happening since March 4, Claudette Singh cannot escape scrutiny in this scenario. “; – “ Singh has skipped from one ugly decision to another that is simply destroying this country”; and “ Her latest display is her communication to the Police Commissioner on allegations made by APNU+AFC.

Kissoon’s reference contained in my last quote attempts to further tarnish the reputation of Madam Singh when he alleged in his column that she didn’t see it as ethical or decent to include the Commission in her decision…..” This claim of Kissoon is without foundation, is a blatant lie and should be cause for libel action against him by Madam Chairman Singh, if she so chooses to proceed against him. It is clear that he has been fed a diet of lies by his friends at Freedom House, and vomits it up without even the benefit of a cursory check to find out if what he claimed is true.

I am advised by Commissioner Desmond Trotman that at a meeting of the Commission, Madam Chairman Singh brought to the attention of the Commission the relevant information and the course of action she had taken. Her action flowed from two previous meetings. The first was with the APNU+AFC when their representatives referred to serious anomalies witnessed by their agents in the evolving recount exercise. They were told to provide the evidence they claimed to have, and when that was done steps would be taken by GECOM to verify the validity of the concerns raised.

The second meeting, which occurred on the next day, was one of GECOM Commissioners, which discussed the issues raised at the meeting between GECOM and the APNU+AFC delegation. I am further advised by Commissioner Trotman that Madam Chairman Singh at that meeting made the point that he who asserts must prove and she committed to acting to clarify whether the information, once provided had merit.

In my humble opinion, Kissoon’s ramblings lack merit and are merely propaganda items manufactured in Freedom House to advance their devious campaign to bully their way back into office.

I propose to examine here the most recent controversy over the GECOM Chair writing to the Police Commissioner to verify names on an APNU+AFC list submitted to GECOM as persons who allegedly voted on Election Day when, in fact, they were out of the country. This matter is linked to the PPP/C’s objection that GECOM has no power to address irregularities and anomalies in the recount process. There are opposing views both in and out of GECOM, and with most legal matters, the courts are the final arbiter on these controversies. In the absence of a court ruling, the Chair and GECOM have to press forward bearing in mind the following: Time-frame of the recount; the known division in the Commission; and the need for addressing the important revelations coming out of the examination of the ballot boxes.

These are all in the national interest since it is important for the acceptance of the recount findings. In this situation, Chairman Claudette Singh will be expected to cast the crucial vote if the Commission is deadlocked if and when a vote is taken. She, therefore, needs to be allowed some space to inform herself on matters she needs to address. Writing to the Police Commissioner for immigration information is one such occasion. The PPP/C and Kissoon and his handlers, in their obsession with “power”, are not thinking right. They are poor dialecticians, to say the least. They fail to see the intrinsic interrelation between Claudette Singh’s ability to exercise her casting vote objectively and independently, which requires her to be confident of information laid before her. Denying her that critical space can be counterproductive to the PPP/C’s interest.

Kissoon’s erroneous theory of “deep-state conspiracy” is malicious and dangerous propaganda that can destroy the fragile fabric of our society. He writes: “Singh has skipped from one ugly decision to another that is simply destroying this country.” Any objective observer of the election crisis will be hard-pressed not to recognise the perilous situation that GECOM and the country are facing as we seek to determine the credibility of the elections. If Claudette Singh did not act responsibly in the election crisis, we may not be speaking of wanting a democratic outcome. To the extent that we are not burning like America is the result of the good sense demonstrated by the President, the Opposition Leader and the Chair of GECOM. Only the mind of a “political lunatic” can’t comprehend this reality.

As I said earlier, the PPP/C, Kissoon and his handlers are not thinking, but are driven by “lust for power”. Their chosen strategy of attacking, demonising and falsely accusing the GECOM Chair of colluding with the government and APNU+AFC can backfire for that party and their supporters, like Kissoon. All the Chair has to do at the critical moment is to declare that the Opposition has no confidence in her impartiality, and as such refuse to vote.

I end by stating that the PPP/C’s political nearsightedness in their dealing with GECOM and Chair, Justice (Ret’d) Claudette Singh is self-defeating.

Regards,
Tacuma Ogunseye

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_06_06_2020

…Harmon says coalition will continue press GECOM to address irregularities

CONSEQUENT upon the request by A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) executive member Joseph Harmon for a response from the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) on what will be the outcome of his party’s objections in the national recount process, People’s Progressive Party agent Anil Nandlall has written the commissioner of police stating that what Harmon did amounts to a threat.
Harmon voiced this on Friday in his briefing with the media, pronouncing further that he is not fazed by Nandlall nor any of the opposition’s couriers.

Nandlall wrote the police commissioner saying that I issued a threat. I do not know who retained him to write that letter– I suppose it’s the PPP– that [my writing] on behalf of the people of Guyana requiring GECOM to do what they are legally required to do, that that amounts to a threat. Well I want to say to Mr. Nandlall and the other people who have built an annex to Freedom House under these tents, that that does not faze me. I will continue to press for the right and the justice of our Guyanese people to ensure that their votes are properly counted and validated and whatever comes out of this process, represents the will of the Guyanese people expressed on March 2 2020,” Harmon said.

He told the media that his major concern is how GECOM will treat with the anomalies raised and irregularities identified, since he is of the view that it is going to be a challenge for the commission to come to a definitive position where the votes are concerned; especially since the number of cases they have raised has compromised a qualitative figure of 90,000 votes.

“These are major issues which touch and concern the credibility of this process and concern the votes that are tabulated. What is taking place right now is a tabulation of those votes and so when it is announced as valid, we have an objection to that, because a valid vote is a vote that has actually been tabulated and gone through a process of assessment, taken into consideration, the observations and the objections which have been made; and they are many. There are hundreds of persons we have objected to who were not here on the second of March and voted. We had several persons who are dead and voted,” Harmon expressed.

Alluding further that, “The phenomenon yesterday particularly as it relates to votes on the lower East Coast, where somehow it appears that all the POs that were doing duty in predominant PPP strongholds forgot all the training they got from GECOM and therefore you have boxes with ballots only. That’s a very obnoxious position that anyone can take to say that these are valid votes and I’m happy to see this morning that tabulation officers are at it. And they brought to our attention several other boxes with the same disease.”
He said that all they are requesting to know, is how the commission will respond to these concerns which were raised by the party. Harmon noted too that this part of the process will be done very shortly, “so we must have a clear position on that particular issue, and they have an obligation to respond to these issues.”

Harmon said that it is his party’s responsibility as a stakeholder in the recount process to put to the commission, all of the defects they have seen, which he says amount to electoral fraud.

But in the commission itself, he pointed out, “the PPP commissioners were filibustering, they were trying to prevent the commission from meeting to deliberate on these matters, so that they can run out with these only tabulated numbers to say that we win or lost.”
He reiterated that the process is not completed at the end of this phase, in fact, “it’s a four- stage process. So after the count is done, there’s a report that has to be submitted by the chief elections officer, that report has to be deliberated upon by the commission itself, and once the commission finishes its deliberations, the chair will make a declaration or statement,” he explained.

However, Harmon also indicated that the party abides by President Granger’s position; that they will await the GECOM chairperson’s decision.

Caricom team

In addition, he said that he believes the CARICOM team’s report will be persuasive, “because they have been brought here to oversee and scrutinise the process and I suspect, they, having been here for the entire period, they like us would have seen on a daily basis, the genies that are emerging out of these boxes when they are open. We trust that GECOM would make an honest assessment of what they saw and produce to the elections commission, a report that deals with the credibility of the process. We recognise GECOM as being the competent authority, and we trust the chair will make an honest declaration with what is before her. The observations and objections of the recount must be the facts to be taken into consideration in making her determination,” Harmon posited.

Meanwhile, Nandlall told the media that someone in the secretariat mischievously advised recount personnel to be inserted into the Observation Report, language to suggest that the votes and the recount are invalid.

To this end, he said that it is unfortunate language since he is of the understanding that no one in the recount process can invalidate a ballot except the ballot is a forgery, or if it has multiple marks or if it is unstamped.

In fact, he said all the objections being raised by the coalition are not grounds to give GECOM the power to invalidate a vote. This power, he said, only lies in an elections court.
He stated too that GECOM cannot determine the credibility of the elections. “No man can be a judge in his own cause. GECOM can’t judge its own process. GECOM managed the electoral process, so they can’t sit to judge themselves.

More importantly, the constitution says that only the High Court has exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine any allegation of irregularity and negligent conduct or actions at an election,” Nandlall said.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_06_06_2020

…AG says as EU complains about delayed abolition of the law
…says dissolution of Parliament prevented scrubbing of the law

The European Union has criticised the government for still having on its law books criminal defamation, which can see journalists being jailed for libel, but Attorney General, Basil Williams said that the administration had already committed to scrubbing the legislation, but was hampered by the dissolution of parliament.

In its final report on the March 2, 2020 elections the EU observed that despite the Constitution guarantees freedom of expression, Guyana is at odds with international obligations and in addition to civil law, defamation is prosecuted also by criminal laws with sentences up to two years of imprisonment. “While there were no ongoing criminal lawsuits or cases of journalists being detained or convicted, the mere existence of criminal liability for defamation constitutes a threat which may lead to possible self-censorship by media professionals,” the EU stated in its report.

Back in January this year the United Nations Human Rights Report (UNHR) had highlighted the fact that the Guyana had been working to remove defamation from criminal aspect of the laws. According to the report, the Office of the Prime Minister has been working with the Attorney General Chambers towards the decriminalisation of defamation. Those amendments will be before parliament before the end of 2020, the UNHR report had said.

The report had come ahead of Guyana’s human rights review at the UN’s office in Geneva. In its national report submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Council ahead of its third Universal Periodic Review next week in Geneva, the Guyana Government had said it will be pushing for the decriminalisation of defamation and those amendments will be before parliament before the end of 2020. The issue has been on Guyana‘s human rights reformation agenda for some time now.

Media organisations have been lobbying Guyana and other jurisdictions to abolish criminal defamation for some time now. The International Press Institute has said that criminal libel law was born in an Elizabethan England courtroom as a means for silencing critique of the privileged class. The body said a law of such antiquated ethos, has little place in modern society where the press plays a pivotal role in shaping public discourse. The IPI had been actively campaigning for the governments of the Caribbean to redress their current criminal libel laws. At present, the law is vague and open to indiscriminate and inconsistent implementation, largely wielded to quell dissent and stifle government criticism, IPI had said.

While infrequently used in the Caribbean, criminal libel statutes remain, an unnecessary resource at the disposal of any offended official, IPI said, adding that the mere threat of prosecution chills investigation and free speech, sustains corruption, unnecessarily protects public officials, and denies one of the most basic of human rights, freedom of expression.

“Criminal libel is one of the most pernicious media constraints in contemporary society. Implemented at the will of any insulted public official, it frequently leaves no recourse for the defendant. In most countries, truth is not a valid defence, leaving defence a vexing proposition.”

It is not the first time international bodies have come out against Guyana for still maintaining the law on its books. Back in 2013, Catalina Botero, the Organisation of American States (OAS) Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression had reiterated the OAS’s concern over criminal defamation laws, particularly when they punish offensive speech directed at public officials.

Specifically, she recalled the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), which establishes that when relating to matters of public interest “[t]he protection of a person’s reputation should only be guaranteed through civil sanctions”, and that laws punishing insult or contempt of public officials “restrict freedom of expression and the right to information.”Botero concluded: “These principles are key to facilitating open and uninhibited debate about matters of public concern, which is an indispensable condition for the functioning of a democratic society.”

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_06_06_2020

The European Union Election Observation Mission (EU EOM) has presented its final report on Guyana’s General and Regional Elections, noting several shortcomings by the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM); political parties and other stakeholders.

The report was handed over by EU Ambassador to Guyana, Fernando Ponz Cantó to Chair of GECOM, Justice (Ret’d) Claudette Singh, on Friday. The Guyana Chronicle summarised some of the key pointed highlighted by the EU EOM.

FUNCTIONING OF GECOM

From its observation, the EU EOM said that “post-election developments exposed a dysfunctional commission unable to control its own secretariat.” It said that the commission’s deliberations, decisions, instructions and essential electoral data were not publicly accessible.

Meanwhile, it noted that the bipartisan composition of the commission resulted in excessive polarisation, affecting the commission’s ability to function, reach common ground and make timely decisions.

“By failing to take decisive action as the electoral process derailed into chaos and illegality, GECOM abdicated its constitutional duty to take all actions necessary to ensure compliance with the law by any of its officials, despite unequivocal powers to remove and exercise disciplinary control over them,” the mission stated.

CAMPAIGN FINANCING

The mission noted concerns regarding campaign financing, stating that the legal framework did not sufficiently provide for transparency, accountability and oversight. It also said the GECOM did not assume its oversight responsibility to monitor campaign finance.

Moving forward, it recommended that effective legislation could provide transparency in campaign incomes and establish reasonable limits for campaign expenditure. It said that this could also ensure disclosure and reporting requirements and effective sanctions guided by an independent oversight body.

ONLINE AND OFFLINE CAMPAIGNING

During the campaign trail, the EOM said that these were “intensely” dominated by the governing A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) and the opposing People’s Progressive Party Civic (PPP/C) but other smaller parties were “barely visible”.

The Mission highlighted that “vote buying in Indigenous communities” was done by both the APNU+AFC and PPP/C with the coalition doing so through development programmes and the opposition through State resources “namely vehicles” at regional level.

While acknowledging that there are no laws to guide online campaigning, the mission said that social platforms channelled massive amounts of derogatory messages, false narratives and racially-heated comments, contributing to confusion and division among Guyanese.

MEDIA MONITORING

While the mission observed that freedom of expression and the media were generally able to freely cover the electoral process, it noted that the media environment is highly politicised. “The media environment is highly politicised, with very few independent media and the majority of media outlets being either directly affiliated or leaning to one of the two main political camp,” the EOM stated.

The EU EOM also highlighted that although the Guyana National Broadcasting Authority (GNBA) was equipped with a permanent media monitoring unit, it informed the EOM that it did not have enough capacity to conduct a thorough monitoring of the election coverage.

On different occasions, it noted that the Guyana Press Association (GPA), denounced cases of journalists being subject to intimidation via social networks, direct intimidation and attempted physical assaults by party supporters and complained about the lack of effective measures to ensure media workers’ safety.

TABULATION AND PUBLICATION RESULTS

The EU EOM has also recommended the adopting of clear written procedures for the transmission and tabulation of election results to ensure consistency of the process in all regions. This includes adequate traceability of handed over electoral documents and possibility for all authorised stakeholders to examine Statements of Poll (SOPs) as required by law.

Meanwhile, it suggested incorporating into law the obligation to accompany any declaration of results by simultaneous publication of detailed polling station results and digital copies of all SOPs. Added to this, it was put forward that the number of valid votes cast for each candidate list should also include all elements of electoral accounting.

DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM

The EU EOM pointed out that: “Once the date of elections is officially announced, all election-related disputes, except for challenges related to voter and candidate registration, should be raised only after the elections by way of election petitions.”

It said that electoral dispute resolution mechanisms are available mainly through judicial dispensation but the right to an effective remedy is not ensured as there are no deadlines for rendering decisions on electoral disputes.

It nonetheless commended the High Court and Court of Appeal for the way they dealt with the two critical post-election legal challenges.

Apart from these, EU EOM also acknowledged that a total of 660,998 voters were registered for the elections which is “well above the estimated resident adult population”. It positively noted that three out of nine presidential candidates and over 40 per cent of all candidates contesting the general elections were women but criticised that no voter education specifically targeted Indigenous people and not enough catering for the voting of Persons With Disabilities (PWDs).

RECOMMENDATIONS

For the next General and Regional Elections, the EU EOM recommended a review and consolidation of the “fragmented” election legislation; the launching of a consultation process to overhaul the composition and functioning of GECOM; the development of effective legislation to regulate political finance; the fostering of transparency and accountability in online and offline campaigning; the transformation of the state-owned media into a genuine public service broadcaster; the adoption of clear written procedures for transmission and tabulation of election results; the accompanying of any
declaration of results by simultaneous publication of detailed polling station results and digital copies of all Statements of Poll and the establishment of a comprehensive election dispute resolution system.

Following an invitation by the President of Guyana, the EU deployed the first-ever fully-fledged EU EOM, of 55 observers from 25 EU member states and Norway, to Guyana between from January 25 to March 20, 2020.

The EU EOM said that it was able to observe and report on all aspects of the election process until March 20, 2020 when it was repatriated to Europe due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_06_06_2020

THE purpose of our political system, as written in Article 13 of the Guyana Constitution, outlines that “the principal objective of the system of the State is to establish an inclusionary democracy by providing increasing opportunities for the participation of citizens and their organisations in the management and decision-making processes of the State, with particular emphasis on those areas of decision-making that directly affect their well-being.”

This Article came out of the 1999 constitutional reform exercise which resulted from the then Opposition People’s National Congress/Reform (PNC/R), under the leadership of Mr. Hugh Desmond Hoyte, signing The St. Lucia Statement with then President, Janet Jagan, on July 2 1998. It was felt, among other things, that “measures and arrangements for the improvement of race relations in Guyana include the contribution which equal opportunities’ legislation and concepts, drawn from the CARICOM Charter of Civil Society, can contribute to the cause of justice, equity and progress in Guyana.”

The St. Lucia Statement has its genesis in the dissatisfaction at the outcome of the elections’ results expressed by the PNCR, and, more importantly, the fear and/or frustration of a significant segment of the population with regard to living under the administration of a party they had not supported to form the Government. This fear and/or frustration has/have its concerns rooted in persons’ opinions that they felt excluded from political decision-making, and that it has impacted their lives.

For years, the society has been told, and some have come to accept, that ours is a winner-take-all politics, where the party which has not secured the Executive, and its supporters, are denied. Again, our purpose here is not to argue any merit or demerit of this claim, but to examine the Article before us, and see how we can make it work in our common good in the here and now, even as conversations continue about constitutional reform.

Careful examination of Article 13 shows that it speaks to a solution to the discontent of 1997. It lays the platform, via the nation’s supreme law, to establish and foster a political solution built on the involvement of all, irrespective of our diversity, but inclusive of the political party supported. In that this Article was assented to by the then President, Bharrat Jagdeo, it was not unreasonable to harbour expectation that he would have charted a new course, consistent with its objective.

This notwithstanding, it does not mean that the Article cannot be activated to its fullest, and add fillip to the enveloping nationalism. The preference, harboured in certain quarters, to foster a politics of dissent or of “our time” does not negate, or should not obscure, the overwhelming desire of the ordinary man and woman to proceed along the road of inclusion.

Whichever way it is looked at, a diverse nation stands to gain more when all feel that their voices are heard, their opinions and inputs valued, their choice of representative respected, and their taxes invested in them, irrespective of political or apolitical interests.
Few, if any, relish living in a nation constantly racked by silly divisions, whose laws work for some and not all, whose citizens oppose only for the sake of opposing; a nation comprised of feeble men acting as though they are omnipotent, and engaging in endless back and forth, with none wanting to concede anything or listen to the other; all being more bent on talking past each other, and everyone out to prove they are right and the other is wrong.

That is not a healthy relationship for any people to cultivate, be it in the home or in public life. Guyanese having gone past the stage of saying ‘enough is enough’, many continue to register disapproval and discontent with their feet. Those who have stayed or desire to return are pleading with their leaders to give development for all a chance to work. The best place to start is at Article 13, given that it aims to ensure a society wherein all can have equal opportunity to realise their God-given potential.

To its credit, the Coalition Government built upon the foundation of inclusionary democracy, and has been making moves to make this realised fully. President David Granger has reminded on many occasions that it was the PNC/R that was instrumental in the establishment of an inclusionary five-party Partnership for National Unity (APNU) in June 2011. He said the APNU, in turn, entered into the Cummingsburg Accord in February 2015 with the Alliance For Change (AFC), which, when combined (APNU+AFC), won the 2015 elections. “The PNC/R, together with its political and civil partners, remains committed to the multi-party coalition, bound together by the Cummingsburg Accord to constructive dialogue with the political parliamentary opposition, and with civil society to strengthen the practice of ‘inclusionary democracy’; to the ideals of coalition politics, and to the broader aspiration of national unity; to perfecting our incipient system of shared governance, in the belief that the coalition parties are better together than apart,” President Granger said at the PNCR leadership congress back in 2018. It is through inclusionary democracy that Guyanese will indeed receive unquestionable benefits in every area of life, and will allow for the deployment of broad-based expertise in nation-building.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_06_06_2020