GECOM needs to move ahead so the nations can settle in to be governed by a President identified as a result of a fair process

Dear Editor

As human beings, we all have our beliefs and interpretation of past and current events.

This shapes our attitudes and in the case of the media, editorial policy and proclivities.

The present situation in Guyana requires all of us to leap beyond these proclivities or if we prefer prejudices for the sake of a secure and viable Guyana.  In view of the above, I can see no difficulty with you publishing this letter, which seeks ultimately to mend and not rend, to heal and not peel a wounded and unhappily divided nation.

I have earlier pleaded long before the Elections that there is the urgent need for our political leaders to talk and find a Modus Vivendi. It is the only, and I repeat only mechanism to salvage and save Guyana.  This need to sit and talk without the media is a matter of grave urgency.

I say urgent, since Covid-19 has exacerbated conditions globally and having an adverse effect on Guyana. Yesterday, the Director General of WHO made an impassion plea for solidarity in dealing with this murderous health pandemic. In similar vein this need is for good sense and solidarity among our leaders. Covid-19 may subside in the not too distant future, but unless every side of the political divide recognizes that in the present charged environment, neither the Courts nor even GECOM can really help us to settle down and move forward as one people. We need to sit and talk to and with each other with civility and sincerity. A prerequisite to talks must be a public affirmation to subscribe to an unchangeable moral code, which we cannot get from any judiciary, internal or external.

For much is left in the hands of Judges and those identified to interpret man’s constructed laws. In this regard, we need to leap beyond human moral sense. We have been reminded in an Encyclopedia of Philosophy “The moral sense is also an influencing motive in our pursuit of virtue and our avoidance of vicious behavior, and it plays a part in our bestowal of praise and blame.”

The key issue and the real challenge is to find some uniformity which will invest all of our leaders with a sense and passion for morality, where the theology of some folks is “thiefology,” and therefore see nothing wrong with stealing, corruption, the manipulation of institutions and our man-made laws and regulations.

It is now popular for us to lean on the experiences and principles of two countries that have generally influenced Guyanese of every generation. These are USA and UK.

Today, we regard them, and rightly so, as great nations and bastions of democracy and justice. It is their history, prowess and internal conditions that propelled them to greatness. We must not forget that in the UK, for example, they traversed a road where they once beheaded their King and saw the suspension and the restoration of Parliament.

Great Britain controlled a vast empire over which they boasted. The sun never sets.

In the United States we find a few who make simplistic statements about democracy in Guyana. They ignore, for example, that the United States maintains the largest and most powerful military in modern history, which in essence has always supported their interpretation of democracy. Rightfully, the Americans rose up against King George III, which led to their declaration of Independence in 1776, making a solemn promise for equality and justice for all men. But less than one hundred years later the American Civil War broke out between the north and south.

The issue of enslaved Africans was foremost, yet one hundred years later, black people was still struggling to enjoy the promise or democracy which presupposes a quality of opportunity in every aspect of life and the true meaning of their creed that all men are created equal. We witnessed the war in Mexico which was anchored upon expanding Anglo-Saxon concept of democracy.

Of course, in this region, we had the invasion of Grenada in 1983, which almost split CARICOM in two, all in the name of democracy. Grenada is a tiny island of 110 citizens, less than the number who lives in Georgetown and less than those that congregate in a shopping mall on any day in any European or North American city.

Guyanese must work tirelessly to agree on morals and an uncompromising code of conduct for all persons in position of influence and authority. Political leaders, religious leaders, public officials including teachers and the security forces must be men and women with strength and good character. Guyana, thanks to our colonial history, is suffocating because of this question of ethnic identification, where from my analysis, perhaps eighty percent of voters are influenced by race.

Happily, we have twenty percent population that have risen above considerations of race and religion. The above is not the result of a scientific analysis but my own conclusion having traversed every part of Guyana for over six decades. Talks must therefore not seek to avoid this real issue.

We have today an interesting situation where to my mind, the CCJ for whatever reason has cast aside our laws and assaulted our sovereignty, commenting on matters suggesting a bias and avoiding what is the crucial issue of the integrity of ballots cast in our 2020 Election. As a lay-person, I find it completely irrelevant, the CCJ’s reference to the December 15, ‘No Confidence” motion. They side-stepped the circumstances, which led to the ballot recount and what ought to be the consequences of that ballot recount.

The Agreement for the recount was brokered by CARICOM and signed by the representatives of the two principle players of the 2020 Elections, PPP represented by Leader of the Opposition, Bharat Jagdeo and Leader of the Coalition, David A. Granger.

That Agreement states as follows: “there must be reconciliation of the ballots issued, with the ballots cast, destroyed, spoiled, stamped and as deemed necessary their counterfoils/stubs: authenticity of the ballots and the number of voters listed and crossed out as having voted; the number of votes cast without ID cards; the number of proxies issued and the number utilized; statistical anomalies; occurrences recorded in the Poll Book.” Me, as a layman, the vital word is “authenticity.”

If during the recount, documents required to satisfy the above spirit of the agreement and to achieve authenticity are missing for whatever reason, then those purported ballots found in the box ought not to be any credence. As a lay-person I can only deal with simple logic and reasoning. Whoever and whatever is responsible for these vital and necessary documents being missing is of course, another serious matter.

How could Judge Sanders claim that a number of persons’ votes were excised by Chief Elections Officer is worrisome or is he giving credit to votes cast for the dead and names of persons not qualified to vote but whose names appear on the voters’ register used on March 2nd. In life journey, you experience many examples of what we term collateral damage but that have always been vagaries of life on earth. I am a simple man and could abide by simple answers. I hope that by the time this letter is published we can see GECOM moving ahead so the nations can settle in to be governed by a President identified as a result of a fair process.

Regards
Hamilton Green

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_7-12-2020

GECOM Chairman must now follow the law

Dear Editor

The Guyana Elections Commission Chief Elections Officer Mr. Keith Lowenfield has submitted his report to the Chairman. Mr. Lowenfield has done so within the constitutional provisions and the law. He has acted prudently, judiciously and legally.

It is now imperative that Madam Justice (Rtd) Claudette Singh concludes the process by also acting within the law and declaring the results of the March 2nd General and Regional Elections. Chairwoman Singh cannot delay any longer. She is learned in the law and knows well that no court can instruct the CEO how to act nor can she do so. The CEO must act strictly within the constitution, Guyana’s supreme law. And he has done so. Failure by the Chairman to act on the report submitted by the CEO can see her cited for misconduct in public office and actions taken to remove her from her post.

Certainly Madame Justice Singh would not wish for her otherwise stellar career to be tainted by acting in contravention of the law. Should she stray from the law it would be a grave injustice and devastating wound to Guyana’s democracy. Once she acts in accordance with the law aggrieved parties will have recourse by way of elections petition as affirmed by the Caribbean Court of Justice. There is only a singular course of action now for the Chairwoman and she must act accordingly.

Yours sincerely,
Earl Hamilton

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_7-12-2020

CEO submits elections report

…showing victory for APNU+AFC
….GECOM Chair to now declare

By Svetlana Marshall

GUYANA’s Chief Elections Officer (CEO) Keith Lowenfield has submitted his Elections Report to the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), showing a win for the A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC).

The Elections Report, the third of its kind since the conduct of the March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections, was submitted to the Chairman of GECOM, Justice (Ret’d) Claudette Singh on Saturday at around 11:00hrs by the Chief Elections Officer. It is reflective of the declarations made in March 2020 by the Returning Officers in the country’s 10 Electoral Districts.

According to the Elections Report, there were a total of 475,118 valid votes cast at the General and Regional Elections, and of that number, the APNU+AFC secured 236,777 votes, while the PPP/C raked in 229,330. A New and United Guyana (ANUG) received 2,275 votes; Change Guyana, 2,026 votes; Liberty and Justice Party (LJP), 2,569 votes; People’s Republic Party (PRP), 862 votes; The Citizenship Initiative (TCI), 680 votes; The New Movement (TNM), 246 votes; and the United Republican Party (URP), 353 votes. There were a total of 3,997 rejected ballots.

Based on the valid votes cast in favour of the Lists of Candidates that contested the elections, the APNU+AFC was allocated 33 seats; the PPP/C, 31; and the Joined Lists – ANUG, LJP, TNM – one seat in the National Assembly. The National Assembly has 65 seats.

LAWFUL COMPILATION

In submitting his Elections Report, the Chief Elections Officer told the GECOM Chair his Report was consistent with Article 177 (2) (b) of the Constitution, and the Elections Laws governing the country. “It is my understanding that Article 177 (2) (b) of the Constitution affords the technical officer the right to advise the Chairman of the elections result that ought to be declared. In this regard, I have prepared and submitted the results of the General and Regional Elections in accordance with my statutory and constitutional duties, and all applicable laws,” Lowenfield said in a signed letter to Justice Singh.
Lowenfield, on Friday, July 10, had sought clarification from the GECOM Chair, based on a request she had made but instead of providing the required clarity, Justice Singh insisted that the Elections Report be submitted in accordance with Article 177 (2) (b), Section 96 of the Representation of the People Act; and the Certificates of Recount, which were generated during the 33-day National Recount.

A COLLISION WITH THE CONSTITUTION, ELECTION LAWS
In his Friday, July 10, 2020 letter, the Chief Elections Officer had said that the July 8, 2020 judgment of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) in the case – Irfaan Ali and Bharrat Jagdeo v Eslyn David and others ruled out the notion that the Elections Commission could determine the credibility of the Elections. On that basis, he said Order No. 60 – the legal instrument used to trigger the National Recount – could not be executed in its entirety. The primary objective of the National Recount was to determine a final credible count as provided for in Order No. 60.

Further, Lowenfield sought clarity on the request for another Elections Report under Section 96 of the Representation of the People Act.
“Kindly provide guidance on how Section 96 (1) of the ROPA could be properly operationalised,” the Chief Elections Officer asked, while noting that “of particular relevance are two facts: 1) that the election law envisages that “the votes counted, and information furnished” would be provided by statutory officers and 2) the allocation of seats is premised on the statutory report of the Returning Officers.”

On March 14, the Chief Elections Officer had submitted to the GECOM Chair an Elections Report on the basis of declarations made by the Returning Officers in the 10 Electoral Districts, in accordance with Section 96 of the Representation of the People Act, but those declarations and the Elections Report were placed in abeyance to pave way for a national recount, after allegations of electoral fraud had erupted during the tabulation of the Statements of Recount in District Four.

The Elections Commission had relied on Article 162 of the Constitution, and Section 22 of the Elections Law (Amendment) Act to bring Order No. 60 into effect, but the CCJ, in its ruling, said the allocation of seats in the National Assembly and the identification of the successful presidential candidate could only be based on the reports of the Returning Officers.

Paragraph 37 of the judgment reads: “Both the allocation of seats in the National Assembly and the identification of the successful presidential candidate are determined on the sole basis of votes counted and information furnished by Returning Officers under the Representation of the People Act.”
Against this background, the Chief Elections Officer reminded the Chair of the Elections Commission that the National Recount was not undertaken by Returning Officers. “The concluding opinion [Paragraph 52] of the CCJ’s judgment states that Order 60 is in tension with the Constitution of Guyana, and could not create a new election regime,” Lowenfield had said.

The Chief Elections Officer had also informed the GECOM Chair that her “missive” dictating how the Elections Report should be compiled was contrary to the historic practice, since Article 177 (2) (b) states that it is the Chief Elections Officer who must advise the GECOM Chair.

EYE-PASS

But Lowenfield’s Elections Report did not sit well with the PPP/C nominated Elections Commissioners. In an interview outside of GECOM’s High and Cowan Streets Headquarters on Saturday, Elections Commissioner Sase Gunraj said it was disrespectful for the Chief Elections Officer to defy the instructions of the Chair of the Elections Commission.

“I view this as a very clear and flagrant violation of the specific instructions as were contained in two letters; two letters under the hand of the Chairman to the CEO. Now, I could choose to use all of the nice words, like contemptuous, or the violation of the instructions, but you know what word came to mind this morning when I saw that [report], it is that the CEO eye pass this Commission,” Gunraj told reporters.

He pointed to the fact that the Elections Report was not reflective of the votes tabulated during the National Recount at the Arthur Chung Conference Centre in May-June.
“That report does not contain the correct numbers as was generated by the recount exercise, and those numbers; I have not checked them in detail, but I can tell you definitively they do not reflect the numbers that were generated by the recount exercise,” he said, while accusing the Chief Elections Officer of rigging the elections in favour of the Coalition.

While the Chief Elections Officer’s Report on the National Recount showed a win for the PPP/C by 15,000 votes, the accompanying Observation Reports, which were stipulated by Order No. 60, revealed that there were widespread irregularities and cases of voter impersonation during the elections.
At Saturday’s meeting of the Commission, the Government-nominated Commissioners were not present, and as such there was no quorum; the meeting was therefore adjourned. An official statement from GECOM has not been issued on the recent developments; however, the Guyana Chronicle understands that the Elections Commission is expected to meet early this week to discuss the submitted report.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_7-12-2020

Int’l observer missions issue more statements

…call for transparency in tabulation of Region Four results

THE international observer missions from the Commonwealth, the European Union, and The Carter Center, on Friday, encouraged all stakeholders in Guyana’s electoral process to use all available means to conclude the process in a transparent manner.

In a statement issued on Friday, the international election observation missions in Guyana noted that they are “deeply concerned about the continued lack of transparency in the ascertainment of results for Region Four.”
The missions, in a joint statement, said that the orders of Chief Justice, Roxane George-Wiltshire, on March 11, were not followed. The missions stated that the tabulation process did not resume on March 12 as mandated by the court.

“When the tabulation process was resumed on March 13, 2020, it was not in line with the judgement, which required public tabulation as a safeguard and a measure for promoting transparency and accountability,” the missions said.

It was noted that the Chief Justice subsequently reasserted that the actual Statements of Poll (SOPs) have to be displayed in tabulation process for Region Four.
“The orders issued with the judgement should be complied with, and the tabulation process conducted and concluded accordingly. Unless and until this is done in Region Four, the election results cannot be considered credible,” the bodies said.

They urged all the political parties involved, to adhere to the codes of conduct they signed and to do their utmost to ensure that a peaceful environment is maintained.
Meanwhile, the OAS Observer mission has withdrawn from Guyana.
The mission said that the returning officer for Region Four did not undertake his role in the “the required standard of fairness and transparency.”

The Chief Justice’s ruling, handed down on March 11, required the returning officer or deputy returning officer to determine the best method of tabulating the statements of poll and included the expectation “that the returning officer would act reasonably in ensuring a process that allows persons to observe what is being tabulated and how.”

The body noted that the RO continued to ascertain the votes cast for each party list without affording the duly-authorised candidates and counting agents an opportunity to see the SOPs, in order to compare them with the copies in their possession. “Such a process could have been easily facilitated using the same technology which allows the tabulation to be displayed,” the body said.

The mission alluded to the controversial SOPs published by the PPP/Civic, on its website, which that party claims were given to its polling agents after the ballots were counted at each polling station on the night of the elections. The mission said the SOPs from the PPP produce a result that is “vastly different from that being declared by the returning officer and would have a decisive effect on the outcome of the national elections.”

The OAS Election Observer Mission said it was pleased to have declared that the March 2 poll was, in almost all respects, well executed. It noted that the subsequent tabulation of the statements of poll in the other nine regions was carried out in compliance with the law and no dispute has arisen in relation to the declaration of results.

The mission noted that the legitimacy of any government that is installed in the circumstances will be open to question. It said this would be a terrible blow to the country’s democracy.
The Chief of Mission will prepare his report for submission to the Secretary General.

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

Widespread fraud

… Chief Elections Officer fells Commission that polls lack, credibility

 … savs fraud recorded in all 10 districts 

… cites close la 5,000 cases at voter impersonation, aver 2,000 anomalies

… more than 200, 000 votes impacted

By Svetlana Marshall 

TILE 2020 General and Regional Elections lacked credibility, according to Chief Elections Officer (CEO) Keith Lowenfeld, who, in bis Report on the National Recount, pointed to 4,864 casts of voter imperson­ation, and more than 2,000 anomalies that have impacted well over 200,000 votes across the 10 !Electoral Districts. 

The Chief Elections Officer submitted his Report on the National Recount to Chair­man of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), Justice (Ret’d) Claudette Singh, and the six Elections Commissioners – Vin­cent Alexander, Sase Gunraj, Desmond Trot­man, Robeson Benn, Charles Corbin and Bibi Shadick- on Saturday. The Report comprises a tabulation of the votes that were recounted during a period of 34 days (May 6-June 8), and a Summary of Observation Reports for each of the IO Electoral Districts. 

In each of the Observation Reports, Lowenfield established that due to the anomalies and instances of voter impersonation, the General and Regional Elections held on March 2 did not satisfy the criteria of impartiality, fairness and compliance with the Constitution and the Representation of the People Act. “Consequently, on the basis of the votes counted and the information furnished from the recount, it cannot be ascertained that the results in this District meet the standard of fair and credible elections,” the Chief Elections Officer said in his Observation Report for District One (Barima-Waini), a position he iterated for all of the other Electoral Districts. 

According to the CEO’s Report, there were 143 instances in which Certificates of Employment were missing, 1,278 missing Oaths of Identity and 150 cases in which extra ballots were found in ballot boxes, and other instances of missing Poll Books and Proxies. Notably, in District Four (Demerara-Mahaica), 47 ballot boxes were void of the statutorily required documents. These anomalies, the Chief Elections Officer said, are breaches of polling procedures outlined in the Representation of the People Act, and the official manual for Presiding Officers and other Polling Day Officials. 

Across the IO Electoral Districts, there were 4,864 cases of voter impersonation, in which persons voted in the place of the deceased, or electorates who were out of the jurisdiction on Elections Day. 

These 4,864 casts of voter impersonation, which were unearthed by the A Part­nership for National Unity+ Alliance For Change (APNU+A FC), were confirmed by the Elections Secretariat, based on official reports submitted by Chief Immigration Officer, Leslie .lames and the General Registrar’s Office: (GRO). 

REGION ONE 

In his Observation Report on Region One, Loweulfield pointed out that the Electoral District has a voting population of 18,952 electors, which represents two (2) geographical constituency seats of the National Assembly. A total of 99 Ballot Boxes were processed during the National Recount, resulting in a total of 12,111 and 12,060 votes tabulated for the contesting parties in the General and Regional Elections, respectively. For every ballot box processed in the Electoral District, an Observation Report was generated, based on irregularities, missing statutory documents, and allegations of voter impersonation. 

Overall, there were 36 missing Certificates of Employment, and 16 missing Oaths of identity. Oaths of Identity are required by the statutes for electors voting without ID Cards. Additionally, there were 12 cases in which, extra ballot papers were found in ballot boxes without the requisite documentation. 

“Recorded in the Observation Reports were allegations made by a contesting party that there were 29 instances of voter imper­sonation. The party alleged that based on tl1eir investigations in this region, there were 10 instances where deceased persons appeared to have voted, and 19 instances where electors who are alleged to be out of the jurisdiction were recorded as having voted,” Lowenfieldl stated in his report to the Elections Commis­sion, while noting that based on tl1e Reports from the Chief Immigration Officer and General Registrar’s Office, claims have been substantiated. 

Of the 99 Ballot Boxes, Lowenfield said approximately 33 stand affected, due to a total of 93 abnormalities, anomalies, and alleged voter impersonation. 

“In other words, approximately 35% of all votes cast for the general elections are associ­ated with boxes that stand to be impacted, due to either anomalies or voter impersonation,” Lowenfield said. “Specifically, 20% of the votes cast are impacted by anomalies, while 13% were impacted by voter impersonation, and 2% by both anomalies/irregularities and voter impersonation,” he explained. 

Added to that, he said that at the end of the recount of votes for District One, 16 Poll Books could not be found, while there were 52 instances where the evidence of polling activities was not recorded in the available Poll Books. 

“In addition, the actual Certificates of Employment (Forni 4) in 36 cases, and sixteen ( 16) missing Oaths of identity (Forni 19) were not available to support entries in the Poll Books. As a consequence, it cannot be reconciled that electors who cast ballots in these cases met the statutory requirements,” he noted. Notably, two ballots were rejected for want of an official mark (unstamped ballots). 

Based on his estimation, there is a poten­tial that 2,407 votes in 23 ballot boxes stand affected by anomalies and or irregularities. These anomalies, he posited, impact 19.2% o(the votes cast (or APNU+AFC; 28.2% of the votes cast for the Liberty and Justice Party (UP); 19.9% of the votes for the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C); 20.8% of the votes cast for the People’s Republic Party (PRP); and 33.3% of the votes cast for the United Republican Party (URP).

Added to that, 1,593 votes in nine ballot boxes have been directly impacted by allegations of voter impersonation. “Given the fact that it cannot be ascertained who perpetrated the acts of voter impersonation,” the CEO said, “evidence points to its impact on each List of Candidates. Of the nine (9) ballot boxes, 16.1% of the votes cast for the APNU+AFC; 16.5% of the votes cast for tl1e UP; 11. 7% of the votes for PPP/C; 8.3% of votes cast for PRP; and 16.7% of votes cast for URP are impacted,” he told the Elections Commission. 

He reasoned that if the ballot boxes that are affected by the anomalies and voter impersonation are extracted from the process, the total will be 7,917 votes cast, with a distribution of 2,506 for APNU+AFC; 93 for LJP 5,298 for PPP/C; 17 for PRP; and three (3) for URP. 

Based on the wide-ranging cases of irregularities and electoral fraud that oc­curred in the district, the Chief Elections Officer said it cannot be ascertained that the results meet the standard of fair and credible elections. 

REGION TWO 

In Region Two (Pomerooo/Supenaam) the anomalies were no different. Thirty-seven thousand, nine hundred and seventy-nine (37,979) electors were listed on the Official List of Electors, with a total of 135 Ballots Boxes, all of which were processed during the National Recount. 

While there were no reported cases of missing Certificates of Employment in this Electoral District, there were 35 instances in which the Oaths of Identity were missing. Additionally, there were 303 alleged cares of voter impersonation. 

“The Party {APNU+AFC) alleged that based on their investigations in this Region, there were twelve (12) instances where de­ceased persons appeared to have voted, and two hundred and ninety-one (291) instances where electors who are alleged to be out of the jurisdiction were recorded as having voted,’· Lowenfield reponed, while adding that Reports from the Chief Immigration Officer and the General Registrar’s Office confirmed that the allegations had merit. 

He pointed out that 86 ballot boxes from the District stand affected, due to a total of 338 anomalies and alleged voter imperson­ation. 

“Potentially, 745 votes in three (3) ballot boxes stand impacted by anomalies/irregular­ities, which is approximately 3% of all votes cast for the List of Candidates in District Two,” he stated, while noting that when the allegations of voter impersonation are taken into account, some 14,715 votes in 66 ballot boxes are impacted. 

“Against that backdrop, if the ballot boxes that arc affected by the anomalies/ irregularities and voter impersonation are extracted from the process, the total will be 6,708 vote’s cast, with a distribution of 35 for ANUG; 2,787 for APNU+AFC; 48 for CC; 62 for L.IP; 3,737 for PPP/C; 22 for PRP; three (3) for TCI; and 14 for URP be submitted, while making it clear that based on the summation of anomalies and instances of voter impersonation identified in the District, credibility could not be established. 

REGION THREE 

Similarly, in Region Three (Essequibo Islands-West Demerara) the Chief Elections Officer indicated that the elections were compromised due to a mountain of irregularities and alleged cases of electoral fraud. 

With a voting population of 100,758, as recorded on Official List of Electors (OLE), the Region had a total of 355 Ballot Boxes, for each of which Observation Reports were generated. Based on those reports, the CEO reported that there were two Certificates of Employment missing, in addition to 48 Oaths of identity, it therefore means that 50 persons voted without tl1e requisite documents. Additionally, there were 11 instances where extra ballot papers were found or missing from ballot boxes without the requisite documentation. There were also three (3) instances where evidence to validate the usage of Appointment of Proxy were missing. 

Notably, there were 977 instances of voter in1personation, in which six (6) persons voted in the place of the dead, and 971 instances in which unscrupulous people are alleged to have voted for Guyanese who were listed on the OLE, but were out of the jurisdiction on Elections Day. 

According to the CEO, approximately 212 ballot boxes stand affected by a total of 1,041 anomalies, and alleged voter impersonation. “Potentially, 2,517 volts in twelve (12) ballot boxes stand to be impacted by anomalies and irregularities, which is approximately 4 % of all volts cast for the List of Candidates in District Three. These anomalies and irregularities impact 4.3% of votes cast for ANUG; 5°/., of votes cast for APNU+AFC; 3.4% of votes cast for CG; 2. 7% of votes for PPP/C; 2.9% of votes cast (or PRP; 2.6’/ of (votes cast (or TCl; 5.4% o( votes cast for Tm1; and 2.3% of ,vote cast for lJRP,” the CEO submitted. 

When the casts of voter impersonation art taken into consideration, some 44,225 votes in 190 ballot boxes are impacted, resenting 61% per cent of all the votes cast in District  Three. 

REGION FOUR 

In District Four (Demerara-Mahaica), there were a total of 285,6 I 7 electors listed on the Official List of Electors. 

In total, 1here were 879 ballots boxes, and based on !he recount exercise, 1here were 202,077 and 201,575 votes cast in the General and Regional Elections respectively in the coun­try’s largest electoral block. 

Based on the 879 Observation Reports generated, there were 18 instances where evidence to validate the usage of Certificates of Employment were missing; 56 instances where Oaths of Identity were missing; 82 instances where extra ballot papers were found in, or missing from, ballot boxes, without the requisite documentation; and 47 instances where the statutory documents required to reconcile ballots cast al lbt respective polling stations were missing. 

The statutory documents at reference included: The marked Lists of Electors, folios, counterfoils, unused ordinary and tendered ballots, spoiled and rejected ballot papers and poll books. 

“The Commission intended 10 reconcile the ballots cast for the List of Candidates with statutory documents contained in each ballot box as expressed in Order 60 of 2020. However, during the recount exercise, an unusual pattern of missing statutory documents was discovered in forty-seven (47) ballot boxes from Polling Stations in Sub-District East Coast Demerara. The absence of those key statutory documents rendered the required reconciliation of I I,566 votes allocated to the nine (9) List of Candidates impossible, and consequently void of accuracy,” the Chief Elections Officer explained in his report 10 the Elections Commission. 

He was keen on noting that the missing documents were not contained in the Retuning Officer’s package dispatched to the Returning Officer’s office. He noted, too, that when the poll bags were checked, the documents were nowhere 10 be seen. 

Outside of those anomalies, there were 1,706 alleged cases ofvo1er impersonation tied to electoral fraud. Of these cases, 16 involved instances in which deceased persons appeared to have voted, and 1,690 instances in which per­sons who were out of the jurisdiction on March 2 were recorded as having voted. 

“Potentially, 14,510 votes in fifty-nine (59) ballot boxes stand 10 be impacted by anomalies /irregularities; this represents 7% of all votes cast for List of Candidates in District Four,” the CEO repor1ed, while noting that when the allegation of voter imperson­ation is taken into consideration, the affected volts jump 10 79, I 37.

REGION FIVE 

Meanwhile, in District Five (Mahaica-Berbice), ii was discovered that that one Certificate of Employment was missing when a total or 158 ballot boxes were processed during the recount. 

However, there were 60 cases of missing Oaths of identity, and six (6) cares in which extra ballot papers were detected, and other cases of missing Poll Books. Further to that, there were 406 alleged cases of voter impersonation, in which there were seven (7) reported instances in which persons voted for the dead, and 399 ca􀁡es of persons voting in the place of electors who were out of the jurisdiction. 

Based on the CEO’s assessment, 1,088 votes in five (5) ballot boxes stand 10 be impacted by the anomalies cited, and another 14,035 votes. if the allegations of voter impersonation are considered. 

“Given the fact that it cannot be ascertained who perpetrated the acts of voter impersonation, evidence points to its impact on each List of Candidates. 

Of the fifty-seven (57) ballot boxes, 31.5% of votes cast for ANUG; 27.4% of votes cast for APNU+AFC; 51% of votes cast for CG; 54.2% of voles for PPP/C; 40.4% of votes cast for PRP; 45.5% of votes cast for TCI; 40″/o or voles cast for TNM; and 63.2% of votes cast for URP are impacted,” the CEO reasoned. 

REGION SIX 

Over in Region Six (East Berbice-Coren­tyne), there were five (5) recorded cases or missing Certificates of Employment; 43 in­stances of missing Oaths of Identity; 13 casts in which extra ballot papers were found or missing from ballot boxes; and 35 casts where electors appeared to have voted, but were not listed on the OLE. 

In Region Six, there were I 128 cases of voter impersonation, of which seven (7) were as a result of “ghost voters”, and I, 121 were as a result of individuals allegedly voting for people who were out of the jurisdiction. 

“Potentially, 637 votes in five (5) ballo1 boxes stand to be impacted by anomalies/irregularities; this represents I% of all votes ca􀋸t for List of Candidates in District Six. These anomalies/irregularities impact 0.6% ofvo1es cast for ANUG; 2.5% of votes cast for APNU+AFC; 1.5% of votes cast for CG; 0.3% of votes for PPP/C; 1.2% of votes cast for PRP; and 2.3% of votes ca􀁡I for URP, with no impact on the votes cast for TCI and TNM,” the CEO reported. 

Additionally, a total of 47,625 votes in 259 ballot hons were impacted by allegations or voter impersonation, or 74% per cent of all the votes cast in District Six. 

REGION SEVEN 

In District Seven (Cuyuni-Mazaruni), the CEO, based on the 82 Observation Reports generated during the recount, cited 34 casts in which the Certificates of Employment were missing; 390 casts in which Oaths of identity were missing, and another 84 cases in which extra ballot papers were discovered without the requisite documents. 

Further 10 that, there were 32 alleged ca􀉙es of voter impersonation. “In District Seven, two (2) Poll Books were recorded as missing, and four hundred and seventy-six ( 4 76) instances where the evidence of polling activities was not recorded in 1he available poll books. Specifically, thirty-four (34) Certificates of Employment (Form 4) and three hundred and ninety (390) Oaths of identify (Form 19) were 001 available 10 support entries in the poll books. As a consequence, it could not be reconciled that electors who cast ballots in these cases met the statutory requirements,” Lowenfield further detailed, while also citing cases of unstamped ballots that were rejected. 

He believes that a total of 3,805 votes in 31 ballot boxes stand impac1ed by anomalies de­tected. However, 227 votes have been impacted, due to alleged voter impersonation. 

“Finally, the summation of anomalies and instances of voter impersonation identified UJ District Seven clearly does not appear 10 satisfy the criteria of impartiality, fairness, and compliance with provisions of the Constitution, and the ROPA Cap 1:03. 

Consequently, on the basis of the voles counted, and the information furnished from the recount, ii cannot be ascertained that the results for District Seven (Cuyuni-Mazaruni) meet the standard of fair and credible elections,” the Chief Elections Officer told the Commission. 

REGION EIGHT 

lo Region Eight (Potaro-Siparuni), there is a voter population of 7,431, however, ac­cording to the votes recounted, 5,00-0 electors voted, and of that amount, well over IOOO votes have been affected as a result of irregularities, and or voter impersonation. 

According to the CEO, 1,127 votes in 12 ballot boxes stand the risk of being affected due to a range of anomalies, from missing Certificates of Employment (21 ); 10 missing Oaths of identify ( 182); and eight cases of extra ballot papers. 

He noted 1ha1 another 533 votes in six ballot boxes were impacted by allegations of voter impersonation (52), or 11% of all the votes cast in District Eight. “Although it cannot be ascertained who perpetrated the act of voter impersonation, evidence points to its impact on each List of Candidates. 

Of the six (6) ballot boxes, 9.5°/4 of votes cast for APNU+AFC; 6.4% of votes for LJP; 14% of volts cast for PPP/C; and 27.3% of votes cast for TNM were impacted be reported. 

REGION NINE 

A total of 73 ballot boxes were processed during the recount from Region Nine (Upper Takutu-Upper Essequibo), and based on the Observation Reports generated, there were, 26 missing Certifiable of Employment, and 408 instances of missing Oaths or Identity. 

Additionally, there were six (6) cases in which extra ballot papers were found or miss­ing from ballot boxes wi1hou1 1he requisite documentation. 

Further to that, there were 180 instances of voter impersonation, as pointed out by the APNU+AFC, the majorly of which were ca􀀁es in which persons voted for Electors who were out of the jurisdiction on Elections Day. 

“In District Nine, there were four hundred and thirty-five (435) instances where the evidence of polling activities was not recorded in the available poll books. Specifically, twenty-six (26) Certificates of Employment (Form 4) and four hundred and eight ( 408) Oaths of Identity (Form 19) were not available 10 support entries in the poll books. As a consequence, it could not be reconciled that electors who cast ballots in these cases met the statutory require­ment􀁡,” the CEO detailed. 

It is believed that 2,096 of1he votes in 13 ballot boxes stand 10 be impacted by the irreg­ularities, or 17″/o of all votes ca􀁡t for the List of Candidates in District Nine. 

“On the other hand, a total of I, 729 votes in ten (10) ballot boxes were impacted by allegations of voter impersonation, or 14% of all the votes cast in District Nine. Although ii cannot be ascertained who perpetrated the acts of voter impersonation, evidence poi n1s to its impact on each List of Candidates. 

Of the JO ballot boxes, 16.5% of ,votes cast for APNU+AFC; 20.9% of votes cast for LJP; 12.2% of voles for PPP/C; and II% of volts cast for URP are impacted,􀂰 Lowenfield further added. 

REGION TEN 

Meanwhile, in District 1O (Upper Demerara-Berbice), there were 40 cases of missing Oaths of Identity, and 10 cases in which extra ballot papers were found or missing from the ballot boxes without the required documentation. 

Also, there were two cases in which evidence to validate the usage of Appoin1men1 of Proxy could not have been detected. Further to that, there were 51 alleged cases of voter impersonation. “The Party (APNU+AFC) alleged that based on their investigations in this region, these electors who are alleged to be out of the jurisdiction Were recorded as having voted. In respect of 1he allegations of voter impersonation, responses from the Chief Immigration Officer and a review of1he General Registrars Office’s Deceased Reports confirmed that these were of substance,” Lowenfield told the Commission. 

According to the CEO, 1,022 votes have been affected by the irregularities, while another 2,538 have been impacted by the allegations of voter impersonation, representing 11 % of all the votes cast in District Ten. 

To closing, a total of 29,954 votes have been affected as a result of the anomalies detected throughou1 the recount, while another 204,268 have been directly impacted as a result of the allegations of voter impersonation. In accordance with the Gazetted Order, which triggered the National Recount, the Elections Commission is ,expected to meet soon to deliberate on the CEO’s report, and will determine the way forward.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_6-14-2020

‘This is not a horse race’

…President Granger says comments by Gonsalves, Arthur have no impact on process

NO foreign head of state should comment on Guyana’s internal politics until the results of the March 2, 2020 general and regional elections are announced.

This is according to President David Granger in response to questions posed by the host of the ‘Straight Up’ radio programme, Mark Benschop, on Friday night.

Recently, incoming chair of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), Ralph Gonsalves, and former Barbados Prime Minister, Owen Arthur, have come in for heavy criticism over premature comments they made regarding the recount process.

Several days ago, Gonsalves noted, in media reports in St Vincent, that CARICOM expects GECOM will honour the results of the recount and that CARICOM will not tolerate anyone “stealing” the elections.

Said President Granger: ”There is no need for this type of comment, it is not a horse race, and I think people should be prudent in their remarks.” He said he was not attacking Gonsalves’ style of leadership but the President noted that Guyana is not a lawless state and that his government is not a rogue one.

Asked again about Gonsalves’ statement as well as that of former Barbados Prime Minister, Owen Arthur, who supported Gonsalves’ utterances, the President said that he has put his faith in CARICOM, noting that Guyana is aware of what the Treaty of Chaguaramas stands for and the “codes that bind our states together.”

He said that people “must understand we are observant of the codes of behaviour in the community,” noting that he is not worried about the electoral process since it started about 100 days ago.

Rather, the President said that he was “worried by the hooliganism that some elements in the Opposition perpetrated in some rural areas.” He said that whatever is the finding of the election commission, his government will abide by them.

Gonsalves,Arthur’s words have no impact
President Granger noted that the words of Gonsalves and Arthur have no impact on the report of the CARICOM observers noting that this is a novel process. ”I have never had to wait so long for an outcome,” he said. He added that there is abundant evidence that elements tried to manipulate the outcome of the elections by committing certain actions in order to get an outcome in their favour.

He said there have been many anomalies which the APNU+AFC has uncovered in the recount process. ”There are too many anomalies to be ignored,” he said, noting that that had been the main reason for the recount. ”That is the reason why CARIOM is here, that is the reason why we have had to wait a 100 days to get a report,” he added.
The President noted that democracy is a process which must not be rushed.” All Guyanese regardless of the outcome will be satisfied with who they voted for,” he added.

If the elections are nullified
The President, when asked if the election is deemed null and void, noted that he is committed to the people of Guyana and he would be prepared to obey the instruction of GECOM and ensure that whatever it takes, the people must benefit from the outcome of the process. He said he is prepared to work with anyone to ensure the people benefit from the ‘good life’ which he promised when he assumed the presidency back in 2015.

There is some misunderstanding about the process, the President said. He reminded the radio audience as well as those tuning in online that the tabulation stage is only one part of the tabulation of the votes cast at the March 2 polls. “It is also important that the report is prepared based on that tabulation,” he said and he noted it must include observations during the process.

“It is not just the recount but also the observation,” the President told Benschop.
He said the observation report of the CARICOM team will be sent to the CARICOM secretariat which will, in turn, send it to GECOM. He said the third stage is the review process by the commissioners. Finally, the fourth stage will see the results and declaration .
“So it is misleading for people to think that the mere tabulation is the completion of the process,” he said.

CEO of GECOM, Keith Lowenfield, presented his report to chair of the commission, Retired Justice Claudette Singh, on Saturday. In his report, Lowenfield concluded that many anomalies which were found in the recount process of the March 2, 2020 polls, indicate that the elections were not credible.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_6-14-2020

The disingenuity of the PPP/C

By Rawle Lucas

I READ in amazement, the doomsday claims being made by supporters of the PPP/C in the Guyana Times, in Kaieteur News and on social media about the state of the Guyana economy. Some of the posts reference the negative balances in the government account at the Bank of Guyana (BOG), numbers inferring excessive tax collection and monies left for the government to spend when the PPP/C was leaving office. Their frenzied views about the data are not consistent with an objective interpretation it. A look at the contentions around the negative balances in the government account is a good example. These writers are not seeking to educate anyone in addressing the negative balance in the account with the BoG. Instead, they are making misleading claims that the coalition has recklessly grown the debt and has bankrupted the economy. I would like to quote Dr. Tarron Khemraj, a highly-respected author of this subject and the one who pointed out the negative balances in the government’s account in the Sunday Business Page of Stabroek News. Dr. Khemraj, who went to great pains to explain what he was talking about states:

“Some observers might be tempted to use the overdraft as a reason to blame political foes. This monetary system, however, was developed for an independent country with its own national currency. It was designed to provide the government with some policy space … to meet expenditure without excessive belt tightening…”.

It is clear that Dr. Khemraj was saying that nothing was wrong with running a negative balance as long as it was not too excessive. The negative values do have positive implications for the country. Persons with sober heads would realise that that extra money would end up in the hands of private banks, which could use it to make loans or otherwise advance its business interests. Clearly, such negative balances have the potential of bringing benefits to the private sector as well through the intermediation process. Dr. Khemraj also noted that the decline in the balance in the account started under the PPP/C at a time when the economy started to decline dramatically.

In seeking to denigrate the coalition, one commentator observed that most of the money was likely spent on personal emoluments. That is not a bad thing either if you are trying to help people to come out of poverty or from falling into poverty. For those who care about the welfare of ordinary Guyanese, those negative balances therefore actually serve a useful purpose. The significance of the money is seen in Guyanese workers being able to retain an additional G$46 Billion in their pockets as a result of the salary increases provided by the government. That is clearly not the interest of the PPP/C, whose echo chamber has taken to social media and other platforms to criticise this sensitive and thoughtful act by government. As can be inferred from the writing of Dr. Khemraj, using its independent monetary system to prevent the public servants and vulnerable people of Guyana from suffering hardships is a worthy act. The logic of the harsh objection of the PPP/C to that action by the government is that people must stay impoverished as they were before being rescued by the coalition. This insensitive disposition to their fellow countrymen and women is incomprehensible. Yet, the PPP/C wants people to believe that if it got back into power, all Guyanese would be treated equally.

The tax collection of the Coalition was cited as being over G$300 billion more in taxes than collected by the PPP/C from around the time that it left office. They express wonderment as to where the money went. What the PPP/C alarmists are not telling Guyanese is that in contrast to the tax giveaways of the PPP/C that averaged between G$150-200 Billion, the Coalition was more judicious in the granting of tax concessions, with the result that more taxes and not less taxes were collected. Further, it must be recalled that the Coalition granted taxpayers a nine-month long amnesty programme in 2018, in which nearly 15,000 taxpayers stepped forward and honoured close to G$10 billion of their tax obligations. The money was owed by persons who did not pay their taxes during the years of the PPP/C. These are people and businesses who saw fairness in the application of the tax laws under the Granger administration and probably felt that they no longer needed to evade taxes just to stay in business or make ends meet. In addition to income tax, people and companies paid their fair share of capital gains and property taxes. Guyanese need to understand therefore that the increase in taxes came from responsible citizenship and not coercive practices.

The alarmists of the PPP/C want Guyanese to believe that the Coalition took their money and wasted it. In what looks like an ardent attempt to distort the truth, persons have referred to monies left with the Coalition by the PPP/C when it left office. With all that money that the PPP/C claimed it had in 2014, according to World Bank data, Guyana could only use 20 per cent of its GDP to invest in expanding the economy and improving the lives of the people of this country when the Coalition took over in 2015. Through proper management of the economy, Guyana is now able to use 37 per cent of its GDP for investments and to improve the lives of the people. All of this happened before the first barrel of oil was produced. As a consequence, the country has the capability to grow itself at a faster rate than before and that ability came from prudent spending of the taxes collected to help people and businesses. If one wants to talk about reckless spending, one must look at what happened from 1992 when the late President Hoyte left Guyana with the ability to spend 51 per cent of its GDP to improve the lives of Guyanese. By the time the PPP/C left office in 2015, it was at 20 per cent after falling all the way to eight per cent in 2013.

None of the critics can prove that the Guyana economy is unsound and incapable of sustaining the lives of its people. It is impossible for them to make that claim because the economy grew for five consecutive years under the Coalition administration. If one were to look back at the first term of the Jagdeo administration (2001-2005), one would see that the economy contracted on several occasions and the best growth rate of Jagdeo’s first term was below the lowest growth rate of the Granger administration. The performance of the first era of the Jagdeo administration culminated with a flood of the country in 2005 that devastated the lives of many Guyanese who were already struggling in a world of poverty. Yet, the propagandists of the PPP/C are stifling their conscience about the good handling of the economy under the Granger administration which could have only come from sound economic management.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_6-14-2020

THE BATTLE FOR THE SOUL OF THE NATION

THE imminent decision expected from the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) on the national recount cannot be over-emphasized. It teems with the potential to shake, nay, crumble the very foundation of values and basic principles on which our society rests, and, if it pleases you, wherever humanity exists. It has become painfully clear that the March 2nd national and regional elections were replete with fraud, if only by public perception. As a consequence, consistent with Article 177(1) of the Constitution, it is very difficult to see a declaration that remotely suggests that the witch’s numerical brew before the commission is a firm basis to form a legitimate government. There is no question that the will of the people has been dashed by powerful corrupt interests and it has come down to a battle for the soul of the nation.

Basic Values

As long as society exists, there are basic values that guide our interaction. If we attend school, we are taught that if an exam has been compromised by widespread cheating or fraudulent activities, the entire exam has to be quashed. In the realm of sport, if a game has been tainted by ball-tampering and the digging up of the pitch to gain an advantage, points from the game or competition cannot be used to advance in a tournament. In the professional sphere, if workers submit fraudulent documents for promotion and it is discovered, those workers cannot be allowed to gain promotion. Our laws are replete with safeguards against fraud, if it receives the imprimatur of an elections commission, the entire state loses the moral high ground to pontificate on key arguments of morals and ethics. From the ordinary hustler in the street to the highest office in the land, we would cede ground to a criminal value system.

THE CASE HAS BEEN MADE

Some argue that there was no fraud and the elections were credible. They posit the case of a hoax created by a political party that is desperate to cling to power at all costs. While it is true that politicians will always cry foul in any process that appears not consistent with their interests, and while it is indeed true that elections are often replete with issues, the value of both maxims is contextual. In the context of the March 2nd, 2020 elections, the case of discredited elections has been abundantly made by one political party. Ghost voting and voting by migrants completely kills any chance of the true reflection of the will of the people. Some may want to posit that the questionable votes are not enough to affect the overall results. This is the same argument used in the Zimbabwe elections petition case: Chamisa v Mnangagwa and 24 others (supra). This argument has been discredited by numerous courts, most notably the Malawi High Court which stated: ‘What if the numbers themselves are as a result of an inaccurate counting, intimidation, fraud or corruption? Surely, for an election to be truly free, fair and credible, it must be conducted in full compliance with the Constitution and applicable electoral laws’ (MSCA Constitutional Appeal No.1 of 2020).

THE DANGERS

If a government accedes to office by virtue of electoral fraud, the nation is immediately saddled with a kleptocracy from the outset that will invariably morph into a dictatorship. In this, good governance and accountability are non-starters since the halls of government will be occupied by minds that embrace the idea of corruption as a means of survival. Therein lies the dangers for any population and for this reason, it is a battle for the soul of the nation. A critical national question is before the commission: what is the Guyanese character? Are we a people who eschew fairness and justice? Are we a people who would lend support to wrongdoing? What is our value system?

With all of this in mind, there should be appreciation for the characterisation of this entire process being a battle for the soul of the nation.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_6-14-2020

SUMMARY OF OBSERVATION REPORTS

– FOR DISTRICT TWO 

I. The recounting of votes cast on 2nd March 2020 far Pomeroon/Supenaam, District Two that has a voting population on the Official List of Electors (OLE) of thirty-seven thousand, nine hundred and seventy-nine (37,979) electors, which represents two (2) geographical constituency seats of the National Assembly was completed on 18th May 2020. A total of one hundred and thirty-five (135) ballot boxes were recounted, resulting in a total of26,62l and26,491 votes tabulated. for the contesting parties in the General and Regional elections, respectively. 

2. Upon the contusion of the recount process, one hundred and thirty-five (135) observation reports were compiled in a mmix by ballot boxes, summarising. Anomalies/irregularities, and allegations of voter impersonation. Anomalies/irregularities are breaches of polling procedures outlined in the Representation of the People Act (ROPA) Cap 1:03 and die official manual for Presiding Officers and other Polling Day Officials (Revised 2019). Voter impersonation refers to instances where votes were cast in the names of deceased persons or in names of electors who were not themselves personally present to cast their ballots on 2nd March,2020. 

3. The Anomalies/irregularities include thirty-five (35) instances where Form 19 (oath of identify) that is required by the statutes for electors voting without ID cards were missing

4. Recorded in the Observation Reports were allegations made by a contesting party that there were three hundred and three (303) instances of voter impersonation. The party that based on heir investigations in this region; there were twelve (12) instances where deceased persons appeared to have voted and two hundred and ninety-one (291 ) instances where electors who are alleged to be om of the jurisdiction were recorded. as having voted. 

5. In respect of the allegations of voter impersonation, responses from the Chief Immigration. Officer and review of the General registrars Office Deceased Rrports confirmed that these were of substance. 

6. A total of eighty-six (86) ballot boxes sand affected due to a total of three hundred and thirty-eight (138) anomalies and or alleged voter impersonation. In other words, approximately 75% of all votes cast that for general elections are associated with boxes that stand to be impacted due to either anomalies and or voter impersonation. Specifically, 3% of the votes cast impacted by anomalies, while 55% were impacted by voter impersonation, and IN impacted by both anomalies/irregularities and voter impersonation. 

7. In District Two, seven (7) Poll books were recorded as missing thirty-fin (35) instances where the evidence of polling activities; oaths of identify (Form I9) was not recorded in die available poll books. As I consequence, it cannot be reconciled that electors who cast ballots in these cases met the statutory requirement. 

8. Another procedural error is note worthy, Seventeen (1 7) ballots were rejected for want of official mark (unstamped ballots). 

9. Potentially, 745 -rotes in three (3) ballot boxes stand impacted by anomalies/irregularities this represents 3% of all votes cast for list of Candidates in District Two. These anomalies/irregularities impact 3.5% of votes cast for APNU, 2.9% of votes cast for APNU+AFC, ‘2% of votes cast for CG, 2.5% of votes cast for UP, 2″8% of votes for PPP/C, 5.6% of votes cast for TCI, and 6.3% of voces cast for URP. 

10. On the other hand, a total of 14,715 votes in sixty-six (66) ballot boxes were impacted by allegations of voter impersonation, or 55% percent of all the votes cast in District Two. Although it cannot be ascertained who perpetrated the act of ,voter impersonation, evidence points to its 

Impact on each List of Candidates. Of the sixty-six (66) ballot boxes, 40% of votes cast for ANUG, 44.5%  of votes cast for APNU+AFC, 51% of votes cast for CG, 31.4% of votes cast for LJP, 59.8%of votes for PPP,’C, 52.6% of votes cast for PRP, 44.4% of votes cast for TCl, and 54.7% votes cast for URP are impacted. 

11. Additionally, there were seventeen (17) ballot boxes 17% of votes cast in District Two that are impacted by both irregularities and impersonation. These seventeen (17) ballot boxes impacted the votes cast for Lisi of Candidates as fallows: 15.3% of votes cast for ANUG, 14.7% of votes cast APNU+AFC, 15.2% of votes cast for CG, 14.9% of votes cast for LJP, 17.6% of votes for PPP/C, 8.8% of votes cast foe PRP, 33.3% of votes cast for TCI, and 17.2% of votes cast for URP.

12. Against this backdrop, if the ballot boxes affected by the anomalies/ irregularities   and voter impersonation are extracted from the process, the total will be 6,708 votes cast with a distribution of 35 votes for ANUC, 2,787 votes for APNU+AFC, 48 votes for CG  62 votes for LJP, 3,737 votes for PPP/C, 22 votes for PRP, 3 , votes for TCI and 14 votes for URP. A detailed statistical presentation of the categories of anomalies documented is summarized in Table 1 and detailed in Table 2 (Broadsheet) annexed lo this report.

13. Finally, the summation of anomalies and instances of voter impersonation identified in District Two clearly does not appear to satisfy the criteria of impartiality, fairness, and compliance with. provision of the Constitution and the ROPA Cap 1:03. Consequently, on the basis of me votes counted and the information from recount, it cannot be ascertained that the results for  District two, Pomeroon-Supenaam, meet the standard of fair and credible elections.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_6-14-2020

SUMMARY OF OBSERVATION REPORTS

– FOR DISTRICT ONE 

l. The recounting of votes cast an 2nd :March 2020 for Barima/Wami, District One that has a voting population on the Official List of Electors (OLE) of eighteen thousand, nune hundred (18,952) electors, which represents two (2) geographical constituency sears of the National Assembly was completed on 15th May ‘2020. A total of ninety-nine (99) ballots boxes were recounted, resulting in a total of 12,111 and 12,060 votes tabulated for the contesting partes in the General and Regional elections, respectively. 

2. Upon the conclusion of the recount process, 99 observation reports were compiled m a matrix by ballot boxes, summarising anomalies irregularities, missing statutory documents, and allegations of voter impersonatioo. Anomalies and irregularities  are breaches of polling procedures outlined in the Representation of the People Act (ROPA) Cap 1::03 and the official manual for Presiding Officers and other Polling Day 0fficials (Revised 2019). Voter impersonation refers to instances where were cast in the names of deceased persons or in names of electors who were not themselves personally present to cast their ballots on 2nd March 2020. 

3. The anomalies/irregularities include: 

i. Thirty-six (36) instances where evidence to validate the wage of Form 4 ( certificate of employment) were missing; 

ii. Sixteen (16) instances where Form 19 (oath of identity) that is required by the statutes for electors voting without ID cards were missing and; 

iii. Twelve (12) instances where extra ballot papers were found in ballot boxes without the requisite documentation. 

4. Recorded in the Observation Reports were allegations made by a contesting party that mere were twenty-nine (29) insurances of voter impersonation. The party alleged that based on their investigations in this region; there were ten (10 ) instances where deceased persons appeared to have, voted and nineteen (19) instances where electors who are alleged to be our of the jurisdiction were recorded as haring voted. 

:5. In respect of the allegations of, voter impersonation, responses from the Chief Impersonation Officer md renew of the General Registrar’s Office Deceased Reports confirmed that these were of substance.

6. Approximately thirty-three (33) bill 01 boxes stand affected cine to a total of ninety-three (93) abnormalities, anomalies, and alleged voter impersonation. In other  words, approximately 35% of all votes cast for general elections are associated with boxes that stand to be impacted due to either anomalies or voter impersonation. Specifically, 20% of the votes cast are impacted by anomalies, while 13% were impacted by voter impersonation, and 2% is impacted by both anomalies/irregularities and voter impersonation. 

7. In this District , sixteen (1 6) Poll books were recorded as missing and fifty-two (52) instances where the evidence of polling activities was not recorded in the available poll books. In addition, the actual certificates of employment (Form 4) in thirty-six (36) cases and sixteen (16) missing oaths of identify (Form 19) were not available to support entries in me poll books. As a consequence, it cannot be reconciled that electors who cast ballots in these cases met the statutory)’ requirements. 

8. Another procedural error is note worthy; two (2) ballots were rejected for WBD.I of official marl (unstamped ballots). 

9. Potentially, 2,407 votes in twenty-three (23) ballot boxes stand affected by anomalies/irregularities, which is approximately 2014 of all votes cast for .List of Candidates in Distinct One. These anomalies/irregularities impact 19% of votes Cast for LJP,  APNU+AFC, 28.2% of votes cast for LJP, 19.9% of votes for PPP/C, 20.8% of votes cast for PRP, and 33.3% of, votes cast URP. 

10. On the other hand, the sum of 1,593 votes in nine {9 ) ballot boxes are impacted by allegations of vote impersonation, or 13% percent of all the votes cast in District One. Given the fact that it cannot be ascertained who perpetrated the acts of voter impersonation, evidence points to its impact on each List of Candidates. Of the nine (9) ballot boxes, 16.1% of votes cas1 for A.PNU+AFC, 16.5% of votes cast for UP, 11.7% of votes for PPP/C, 8.3% of votes cast for PRP, and 16. 7% of votes cast for URP are impacted. 

11. Only one (I) ballot box or less than 2% of votes cast m District One are impacted by both irregularities and voter impersonation. 

12. Against that backdrop, if the ballot boxes that are affected by the anomalies/irregularities and voter impersonation are extracted from the process, the total will be 7,917 votes cast with a distribution of 1,506 votes for APNU+AFC, 93 votes for LJP, S,298 votes for PPP/C, 17 votes for PRP and 3 votes for URP. A detailed statistical presentation of the categories of anomalies documented is summarized in Table 1 and detailed in Table (Broadsheet) annexed to this report. 

13. Finally, the summation of anomalies and instances of voter impersonation identified in District One clearly does not appear to satisfy the criteria of impartiality, fairness, and compliance with provisions of the Constitution and the. ROPA Cap 1 :03. Consequent, on the basis of the votes counted and the information furnished from die recount, it cannot be ascertained that the results in this District meet the standard of fair and credible elections.

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_6-14-2020