Dear Sir,

MR. Keith Lowenfield, Guyana’s Chief Elections Officer, should be praised not condemned; he has done his work in accordance with the Constitution of Guyana. The Constitution of our beloved country, Guyana, is unique to Guyana, different in many respects to constitutions in other countries of the Commonwealth. It is Sacrosanct.

Here, in the Cooperative Republic of Guyana, when Officers are appointed to Constitutional Offices, including the office of Chief Elections Officer, at GECOM, they are expected to faithfully and undauntingly, in the face of threats, and abuses, comply with the laws, principles and regulations that govern those offices. Essentially, this is the reason why inherent in such offices are certain levels of authority, derived from the very constitution that establishes such offices, to execute their functions, responsibilities and duties. Their actions to do their constitutional duties cannot be equated with insubordination; how can it? And if by faithfully doing their constitutional duties they are deemed to be insubordinate then the question must be to whom are they insubordinate? This is madness.

In the current electoral process, the Chief Elections Officer has faithfully executed his constitutional duty to satisfy the ultimate goal of the Order No.60 of 202, to ascertain a final credible count for elections 2020, in Guyana. So, why is this Constitutional Officer condemned by, a few, and not praised by all Guyanese for doing his job?

The answer is a simple one: because his constitutional act does not serve their interest, of those few who are seeking to gain political power and take the reins of government. If the Chief Elections officer had submitted a result that included the tainted votes, giving a political victory to another political party would that party and its cohorts, including some of our friends, in CARICOM, and elsewhere condemned him? Certainly no! Therefore, this battle appears not to be about democracy and fairness but interest, on the part of those, who are unjustifiably condemning this Officer. But even if the Chief Elections Officer wanted to do otherwise, he could not because he is constrained by the constitution to ascertain a final result based on valid votes; it could not be anything else. Finally, I wish to highly commend Mr. Keith Lowenfield for his faithful commitment and loyalty to his constitutional duty.

I would not take the trouble to talk about the strange utterances of those, who believe that Guyana is still a colony or a satellite state. Many of those, who are now speaking have troubles in their own countries, which warrant their time and energies much more than them dabbling in our challenge here, in Guyana. And they can talk all they want about President, David A. Granger, his integrity has withstood the test of times; something that cannot be said for even some former and present heads of Governments, who are loudest among those shouting against us, without understanding our local socio, political and economic situation. In the end, we shall overcome.

Yours truly,

Gregory Howe