By Lisa Hamilton
AT a Special Meeting of the Organization of American States (OAS) Permanent Council on Tuesday, former Prime Minister of Jamaica and Chief of the OAS Electoral Observer Mission (EOM) to Guyana, Bruce Golding defended the National Recount as conducted in an “impa1rtial fashion” and called for an end to Guyana elections “debacle”.
TI1e meeting was specifically requested by OAS Secretary General, Luis Almagro, to consider the state of the electoral process in Guyana. However, in his presentation, Golding presented information in contrast to Guyana’s laws and partial with regards to the adherence to the Recount Order No. 60.
In bis presentation, Golding commended the National Recount process as he noted that the OAS EOM bad observed “irregular occurrences” in the tabulation of the Region Foor Statement of Polls (SOPs) and, therefore, a recount of all ballots cast was welcomed.
SELECTIVE ADHERENCE
Flt stressed that Order No.60 established the legal, procedural and administrative guidelines for the recount.
He also highlighted that the Order was birthed out of an agreement between President David Granger and Leader of the Opposition, Bharrat Jagdeo, and CARICOM.
Though the Elections Commission did not adhere to the aspect of the Order which set out to reconcile ballots issued with ballots cast in accordance to a number of statutory documents for the determination of a “final credible count”, Golding told the Council that: ” the process was conducted in a professional, transparent and impartial fashion.”
It is known, by now, as pointed out by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) in the Bharrat Jagdeo and lrfaan Ali v Eslyn David case, that Order No. 60 is in tension with the Constitution of Guyana. Therefore, several lawyers are questioning the justification behind the push for the upholding of Order No. 60 in part.
When this matter was put to the High Court in the recent Misenga ,Jones v The Guyana Elections Commission et al case, the Court ruled that the recount results, which the APNU+AFC contends includes over 2,000 anomalies and over 4,000 cases of voter impersonation, must be used to declare the elections. Tbt Court’s ruling is now being appealed
RECOUNT ILLEGAL
In his presentation, Golding opined that the irregularities noticed during the process were not significant enough to influence the outcome of the recount.
lie said that when the recount results moved to the Elections Commission for deliberation, the Chief Elections Officer (CEO) “went beyond the mandate issued to him in the Recount Order” and invalidated 275,092 votes based on “unsubstantiated allegations”.
“The Council should note that there are only stages at which ballots can be set aside before the results of the election are declared: at the polling station, where the ballots are first counted and during a recount if one is conducted. Beyond that, the invalidation of any ballot is the sole prerogative of the High Court, pursuant to an Elections Petition that can be filed only after the results are officially declared,” Golding said.
However, it is a fact that the National Recount is not one originating from the Representation of the People Act (ROPA) as the Act takes the Elections Commission only up to recounts requested by individual regions in the early days after the March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections.
It directs matters back to the argument of a battery of lawyers that Order No. 60, which triggered the National Recount, was unconstitutional and on that basis, the data generated during that process could not have been relied upon for a declaration of the results of the Elections.
Section 84 (2) of the ROPA states: “Where before 12 noon of the day following the declaration under subsection (I) any counting agent for the district does not request the Returning 0fficer to conduct a final count of the votes counted by the presiding officers in the district under section 83, the declaration of votes obtained by the lists under subsection (I) shall be final. ” The ROPA clearly states that declarations made by the respective Returning Officers (ROs) are final if no lawful request for a recount was made. In the case of Regions Two, Three and Four, requests for recounts in those districts were all denied. Legal luminaries have therefore pointed out that there is no legal basis in the Constitution or Representation of the People Act to conduct the National Recount
Since March 13, 2020, the Region Four RO made his declaration on the Region Four results, the final set to be added to the other 9 Regions. It wasn’t until May 6, a total of 54 days later, that the National Recount commenced.
Even the National Recount Order No.60 notes that requests for recounts in some Regions by the two main political parties were rejected and the time set out in the ROPA had passed. Order No. 60 starts: ”AND WHEREAS the declarations of results pursuant to Section 84 (I) of the Representation of the People Act, Chapter I :03, have been made, but requests for recounts in a number of electoral districts have been rejected, aborted, or held in abeyance.
UNDOABLE DAMAGE
In continuing bis present tat ion, Golding detailed that the CEO, Keith Lowenfield, bas thus far produced a recount report and Elections Reports which do not reflect the numerical outcome of the elections. He also highlighted the rulings of the Court of Appeal, the CCJ and the recent ruling of the High Court on matters pertaining to Guyana’s elections.
“II is distinctly possible, I must say, that this matter can again traverse all the way to the CCJ,” Golding stated. “The people of Guyana are not to be blamed. They expressed their will in a commendably peaceful and orderly manner on March 2. But the pernicious action of a few have reeked considerable damage to Guyana’s image and reputation. Even if the debacle is soon and satisfactorily resolved, it will perhaps take a generation and significant institutional reform for that damage to be fully repaired.”
Meanwhile, OAS Secretary General, Luis Almagro, in his remarks, thanked Golding for his presentation and underscored his position that the elections process in Guyana has gone on for far too long which he believes is due to “attempts to alter the results” of the elections.
He said that the OAS has witnessed attempts to attack the credibility of the National Recount but the results are available today and must be declared. He stated: “Guyana has remained hostage of the electoral officials who insist on altered results despite the fact that the CCJ, the maxim legal authority, has demanded that the report be prepared using the recount results.”
Almagro said that the OAS therefore iterates its call for the Elections Commission to take up the solution of respecting tbt result’s of the National Recount :as agreed by the political parties before the process began. He said that the transition of Government should come in an orderly, peaceful manner given the global health crisis.
Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_7-22-2020