Dear Mr. Lowenfield,
THANK you for your letter of July 22, 2019, and your prompt reply, in response to our letter of July 21, 2019, on the subject of the commencement of house-to-house registration by GECOM.

You are correct in pointing out that, in fact, we had requested, on several occasions, a meeting with GECOM addressed to the chairman and not directly to you and wish to assure you that there was no intention on our part to hold you personally responsible for GECOM’s failure to meet with us.

Our letter raised a number of both factual and technical issues with you with regard to GECOM’s intention to establish a new National Register of Registrants Database (NRRD).

We raised these issues because of the fact that the current NRRD has been subject to cycles of continuous registration, under your custody, since the 2015 elections and has delivered credible National and Regional Elections and Local Government Elections in 2018.
You have, unfortunately, made no attempt in your response to explain or provide any reason for GECOM’s rush to abandon the existing NRRD.

Your response has failed to address the concerns which we have raised about the feasibility and credibility of a house-to-house registration exercise under the conditions which it is presently being conducted. GECOM is forcing this registration in isolation from all of the political parties involved, irrespective of the prior engagement of all of the relevant stakeholders, without independent scrutiny and in the absence of essential public information and education.

Your response has failed to address our questioning the credibility of GECOM’s advice to the President claiming that 200,000 entries on the NRRD should not be there on a register which is under your custody and which has benefitted from continuous registration.
Regards
Private Sector Commission