–Who’s to be blamed?
Dear Editor,
DUBBED the “Mother of All Elections”, the Monday, March 2, 2020 Guyana election appears to have entered uncharted waters that could never have been imagined by the party actors, their supporters and perhaps even the unsuspecting onlookers. Observable evidence to such comes from the seemingly uncharacteristic and inappropriate responses by some of the aforementioned players, entangled in what can be considered the election’s debacle. The spiraling social media innuendos among party supporters seem to have been ignited by the nature of events that surprisingly unfolded from the storming of GECOM’s Region 4 office due to claims of non-transparency in the tabulations of the votes from this region. It would later come to light that the same process/method was used without objection from the said party in all the other nine administrative regions, inclusive of those where the PPP/C was declared the winner.
Amidst the chaos, supporters of both sides claimed to be victors of the elections. In fact, the PPP/C publicly claimed that they were the winners, and circulated purported copies of SOPs supporting their argument, and thus challenged the initial declared results for Region 4. One would ask on what basis does the PPP/C question the legitimacy of GECOM’s declaration for Region 4, especially since the same tabulation method was reported as being used in the other nine administrative regions. Further, after such claims of victory were made, party representatives admitted that of the 879 SOPs for Region 4, they only have approximately 739. Assuming one were to make a conclusion on the alleged 739 SOPs (also assuming these were legitimate), could it be that the 140 missing SOPs had the potential to significantly vary the results? In the reconciliation process of SOPs, if there were any variances, it should be that GECOM, being the sole authority on the matter, must be taken as having possession of the legitimate SOPs. As such, it is the party or parties’ copies that should raise questions; not GECOM’s. Perhaps, the PPP/C knew that the results were not to their advantage, and on realising that they were going to lose, they presented claims of rigging without valid evidence.
Nonetheless, those of this seemingly disgruntled party were allowed their democratic right to challenge the process through the judiciary. This resulted in, as has been evident for the past five years under the Granger administration, the courts rightfully and without interference being able to exercise its constitutional mandate. The Chief Justice ruled that the declaration of the results of Region 4 was illegal. This resonated well with the PPP/C. Consequently, the Returning Officer (RO) Mr. Mingo, was ordered by the court to complete the process as prescribed by the Constitution. Following this order, the RO completed the process, and made a new declaration, still showing that the APNU+AFC coalition won Region 4, a declaration that the PPP/C refuses to accept.
The disintegration of the system and who is to be blamed…
The actions by PPP/C and its allies at the Region 4 GECOM Office were a far cry from the peaceful voting process that took place on Election Day. In fact, many individuals expressed their commendations for what they deemed was a peaceful and seemingly smooth voting process. This is despite reports of attempts to disrupt the process in a few locations. Where these actions are found to be true, the existing mechanism that failed to address such on this occasion must be assessed for an appropriate alternative, geared at countering the same for future elections. Nevertheless, these observed attempts of unfair practices may have mainly resided in the hands of some prejudicial electors; as a result, it will be difficult for the powers-that-be to create a direct link to any party, unless credible and conclusive evidence can be produced on same.
What is extremely alarming is the attack on GECOM’s Chairwoman and staff, which took place at the Region 4 office. Moreover, the onslaught of vile racist rhetoric, including social media content, have been met with a LOUD DEAFENING SILENCE from many, including the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC). One would recall that prior to the elections, the ERC called on individuals like Kester Deane and Brian Kayume to apologise for actions and utterances it deemed divisive and counter-productive to the valiant efforts being made to foster national unity and harmony. Such assertive action taken by the ERC received praises from sections of society. However, the post- elections period has witnessed many prejudicial and other undesirous statements that have created and fueled animosity among our peoples, and have the potential of creating a hostile environment. Where is the ERC in all of this? By equal measure, the racism spewed in this season should be condemned by the ERC. Perhaps as a result of a few PPP-aligned Commissioners, whose social media posts echo and or condone these same racist rhetoric, the Commission is divided, thus its silence.
Clearly, Chairman John Smith, a man of integrity, has eschewed divisive and insidious rhetoric, and endorses national unity, as evidenced by his social-media post. However, collectively, the ERC is yet to condemn the public and obnoxious racist behaviour during and after our general elections by many prominent Guyanese.
The ERC, like other sections of society, must not be silent, but should instead do its work. An attempt to address these issues will shore up public confidence and credibility in the ERC, and help bring it back in line with the earlier demonstrated instrument of fostering and promoting ethnic harmony.
Despite the PPP/C’s arguments on fight for democracy, they must be held accountable for the role that they have played in escalating the 2020 General and Regional Elections to a seemingly violent and uncertain political climate that now permeates our nation. Why did the PPP/C not “formerly exploit” the existing structures that lay resolute in GECOM before channeling such concerns to the courts? Is it that they have no confidence in the expertise of the Chairperson in Justice Claudette Singh (re’td) and her team? Would it not have been more prudent for the PPP/C to ‘rationally and formally’ utilise the appropriate channels within GECOM to address any disgruntlement? Instead, they chose to storm the office, and in so doing, appeared like thugs.
Nevertheless, the very fact that the PPP/C sought to take their challenge to the court in view of their distasteful invasion tactics at the GECOM office, meant that they made the choice to abide by the decision of the court as final, whether it was to their advantage or not. In keeping with court orders, the first declaration of Region 4 was nullified, much to the delight of the PPP/C. However, the process was redone by court order, and again APNU/AFC was declared the winner of Region 4, to the displeasure of the PPP/C. It would appear, then, as if the latter only abides by the law when it is in their favour.
Amazingly, even the supposed intellectual supporters of the PPP/C appear to demand a recount without due course of procedure within Guyana’s legislative framework. This is preposterous; if appropriate legal procedures are not followed, the results can be of no validity. This was evident in Chief Justice Roxanne George’s decision that Region 4’s initial declaration was void and of no effect, thereby instructing the Returning Officer for Region 4 to continue the Region 4 count from where he left off, or to start over the said count within the confines of the legislation, but he retained the right to use the predetermined method as used in other regions.
The rule of law is sovereign. This is what His Excellency David Granger keeps emphasizing; that whatever recourse is taken must be within the confines of our laws. This begs the question: Why the shout by the PPP/C for a seemingly immediate recount, without the required legislative procedures? Is this simply a case of ignorance, or another case of inciting tension that could lead to violence? While such postulations may seem unfair and unreasonable for the PPP/C and their supporters to digest, it is imperative to ask ourselves pertinent questions that will help in bringing a greater level of rationality to the fore. The rationale for the adherence to legislative procedure is as clear as day, and as simple as ABC, yet at times commonsense does not always appear common.
Surely, CARICOM and the International Observers must have known the significance of the rule of law in a sovereign nation. If not, it is hoped that at the very least, this fact in now acknowledged. This is why their voluntary departure is understandable, yet not surprising. Some of the other international observers’ apparent reluctance or defiance to clearly demonstrate impartiality leaves a lot to be desired. The reported unwelcome, rude invasion and interruption of the GECOM meeting by Canadian Ambassador Ms. Chatterjee is one such example. One is led to ask at which point is a house guest of a sovereign democracy allowed to run one’s home. An invitation to observe is just what the term implies; it is not an invitation to instruct or dictate. In this regard, a greater effort by the international observers to be more impartial was greatly lacking.
Guyanese must understand that President Granger does not have the authority to change the applicable law, and where there is a brokered solution, the two major parties will still have to return to the GECOM, only this time through the powers of the courts. Guyana’s Chief Parliamentary Counsel, Charles Fung-a-Fat and GECOM’s Counsel, Excellence Dazzel, have already advised against this treacherous and unlawful pathway, though it was of good intention. Furthermore, to have the CARICOM/ President/Opposition solution gazetted would have infringed on the rights of the electors. Moreover, such an act could set a precedent which could facilitate the usurping of the Rule of Law and the course of justice in the future.
What happens over the coming days or weeks will determine how soon our society returns to its more harmonious ways. What would be the result? Would GECOM be allowed to declare the winner as projected by the SOP’s it received in accordance with the established lawful procedures? Would the declaration be made and the President sworn in and allow for an Election Petition to clear the way for a national recount by GECOM that involves CARICOM?
Given the account of events, it is surmised that the PPP/C lost the elections and tried to prevent the declaration through various means. The PPP/C’s strategy of using a lobbying firm to meddle in Guyana’s electoral affairs runs counter to our core values, and the resulting quagmire is theirs to own. Indeed, the chips have been placed and the dice have been read!
Yours,
Carwyn Holland
Former Mayor of Linden &
President of Guyana Association of Municipalities
