– for nation to use a list that is clearly imperfect

Dear Editor,
THE article seen in the Thursday February 6 edition of the Kaieteur News, titled ‘ A maddening bloated Voter’s List’, is instructive, and I believe a comment from the contesting political parties should be forthcoming.

The situation is worrisome, and as one who has been close to general elections since the granting of Universal Adult Suffrage more than six decades ago, it is unacceptable that a Final Voters’ List should represent a percentage of our population that renders the numbers a total absurdity.

The article, ‘A maddening bloated Voter’s List, should be should read, re-read and digested. For this and other reasons, I earlier urged that the Observers be represented at each and every Polling Place, and not as happened before, seem to focus their attention on certain urban areas.

My attitude to Observers is generally known, but their presence and involvement is now a fait accompli. If this be the case, then my letter needs to be taken seriously by GECOM and the contesting political parties. As a concerned citizen, dipping your finger in the indelible ink provided by GECOM can literally be a cosmetic, or if you prefer, futile operation.
We have known in certain areas, where the finger is not even really dipped. Next, what scientific analysis do we have to show that the ink supplied is the same throughout the country on E-Day. Why House-to-House registration was suspended is a great tragedy, but that’s another matter, and water under the bridge.

These elections are too important for the nation to use a list that is clearly imperfect. It is not too late to salvage this sad situation. As an aside, I note that the Director-General of the Ministry of the Presidency met with a team from the Carter Center, and he assured them that the Government has made all financial resources available to GECOM so that the latter can deliver credible elections.

However, I would have preferred for Mr. Harmon to remind the Carter Center of the role they played in previous Elections, and that he should have extracted from them an undertaking that their scrutiny would be fair and not encumbered by a philosophy which characterised the Carter Center of the late 80s and 90s. I have publicly referred to this apparent philosophy, and the Carter Center operating out of Atlanta is aware of what I am talking about.

Regards,
Hamilton Green