Dear editor,
As a kid, I read the story of an elderly man, bis son and a donkey. The story described the situation where the elderly man, his son and said donkey were happily sauntering along when they came upon some passersby. The passersby, on seeing the elderly man walking in the presence of a donkey, chastised the son and demanded of him that tbt worn joints of the father he assuaged by him being carried by the donkey. Tbt compliant young man respectfully followed the advice of the intrusive passersby. So the three continued on their journey but not long after, they were visited by another intrusive passerby. They condemned the old man for having his son walking while he enjoyed the comfort of the donkey. It did not takt much persuasion for the young man to find his way on the hack of exhausted donkey. So the picture was one of both father and son being transported by the creaking back of the donkey. This did not miss the attention of another intrusive passerby. They condemned both the son and father for burdening, tbt by now languid donkey, with their weight. They demanded that they both now carry the donkey. To appease this group, the son and father bound the donkey’s four legs with rope., used a carrier stick to turn turtle the donkey then proceeded to carried it. The donkey, the smarter of the two fought valiantly to he freed. This it did as they crossed a bridge but unfortunately it landed in the river below, where it drowned. The two compliant men, in the process, lost their donkey because they never followed their instincts; they allowed others to dictate to them what they should do.
This story came to mind as I observed our elections from afar. Our Constitution is crystal clear. G ECOM declares the winner of the elections and the President is sworn in. The aggrieved party can seek redress in the courts if they so wish. The declarations for the IO regions were made on March 13. The next step was for G ECO M to make a general declaration followed by pronouncement of the winner and swearing in of Mr. Granger. Rather than following our constitution, we listened to intrusive passersby with their own agenda. We decided to go into the unknown of a recount, to appease the cries of sanctions and God knows what. Now the CEO has provided the report of the recount, as guided by the constitution. The CEO report is heavily weighted in evidence and numerical analysis. We also have the CARJCOM report which 1s not constitutionally mandated for a declaration. The CARICOM report is essentially a skeletal report that is lacking in evidence and numbers. To just describe what they saw as “defects without providing evidence that informed that conclusion is unbelievable. To state that the GECOM staff were not well trained, when GECOM itself stated that they were well trained, is shocking. They did not interview the staff, so how did they arrive at that conclusion? Have they examined the training manuals for the GECOM staff/ Have they examined the training methodology? Further to argue that the GECOM staff could have been incompetent, without assessing their competence is beyond belief. What they did not say is what spoke volumes. They never addressed the issue of potential electoral fraud. How else could they explain such Widespread irregularities and illegalities, which only occurred in PPP strongholds? Did GECOM only allocate poorly trained or incompetent staff in PPP strongholds? This is highly unlikely and in my humble opinion points in the direction of an intentional manipulation of the electoral process by the PPP. Then CARICOM scrutinising team recommended an investigation for the GECOM staff. Which employer investigates an incompetent or poorly trained staff. The former is d1sm1ssed and the latter would have remedial classes.
Yet despite all these glaring inconsistencies among millions of others, the intruding passersby are once again instructing us to ignore tbt CEO report and focus on the CARICOM report to inform a declaration. What they fail to recognize, is that it was their actions that got us here in the first place. If we were permitted to follow our constitution, like what we did in 1997, then there would have been some stability and certainty. What they also failed to realist, is that our Constitution (177-2b) is explicit in staring that only tbt CEO, via bis report, can advise the Chairwoman on declaration of a winner. The question is, will we now carry the weight of this donkey on our shoulders by disregarding our Constitution once again? If we do not stand up as a sovereign state then more intensive passersby will come along and tell us what to do with our “donkey.” Further, less than to months ago, the appeal court was quite dear in the Ulita Moore case. “GECOM cannot farm out its responsibilities to CARJCOM.” Clearly those with loud voices did not hear that. For if they did, they would have recognised that in the grand scheme of things, the CARI COM report is just a report.
Regards,
Dr. Mark Devonish
Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_6-17-2020