PSC’s recent engagement with GECOM totally hypocritical

0
103

Dear Editor
IT is a widely held belief by some sections of society, as to the role of large sections of the private sector in the planned, orchestrated actions which have brought this country to the socio-political juncture that it is currently at.

Under the umbrella Private Sector Commission(PSC), these commercial and business concerns have been, and still believed to be, one of the major support pillars of the political opposition PPP/C’s attempts to remove the lawfully and democratically elected APNU+AFC government from office. In fact, so obvious has been its open political role that it was questioned by a very prominent business principal, for such a stance.

Of course, its participation as one of the primary supporters of the biggest political parliamentary hoax in the nation’s political annals is well known, in addition to the big mess that it has caused. What was so rude and plainly disrespectful, despite being a co- partner to political falsity and treachery, was its effrontery, emitting of bullyism, that demanded GECOM cease its house-to-house registration, while questioning the need for it. One must further wonder, from where the PSC received such authority, as all Guyanese have a stake in free, fair and credible elections.

Such a presumptuous line could only have been described as one that shamelessly parroted its political party’s line, while shamefully disavowing a legitimate and constitutional procedure which it is fully aware has been the strict guideline for prior PPP/C national elections participation. Instead, it has become the denied subject of the dishonest chorus, demanding immediate elections.

Therefore, the PSC’s recent engagement with the GECOM, under the guise of a stakeholder, is totally hypocritical; it is a misleading attempt to pretend cooperation with, and respect for, the national electoral body’s constitutional authority with regard to preparing for national and regional elections.

Further, in all its public statements and its recent GECOM engagement, the PSC is seriously guilty of continuing to advance a hurried, premature position for GECOM to fix a political putridity that the former has been a party in creating. How could such treachery be washed in the basin of both constitutional correctness and cleanliness is best understood by the political and vested-interest clique in which the PSC continues to be a principal.

Regards
Carla Mendonca