Dear Editor,
THE findings of the fingerprinting and cross matching scanning exercise that was conducted by the Electoral Office of Jamaica in 2006 found duplicate registration for 5374 entries on the Preliminary Voters List.

After conducting a finger-printing cross- matching exercise, the E.O.J said that 1858 duplicate fingerprints were found for 947 records, and 4515 duplicate fingerprints for 4427 registration records, with the former considered absolute duplicates and the latter absolute duplicates. The absolute duplicates were determined from 25%, or 181,030, of the prints that were of good quality, and the remaining 48% of the prints were of poor quality. However, only 423 were unusable.

Dr. Surujbally said that based on the findings, only 00.01% of the scanned registration cards were found to be duplicates, and of these, the E.O.J was absolutely certain of only 947, or 00.02%. However, the multiple registrations detected on the list have elicited concerns among parties. The Electoral Office of Jamaica report also noted that there were 26,239 names in the GECOM Database, for which there were no corresponding registration cards. The Electoral Office of Jamaica report warned that this could potentially result in persons being left off the voters list.

Findings revealed that 6,374 duplicates which were not investigated, which the Electoral Office of Jamaica said was needed to be investigated, 23,000 mismatches and thousands of dislocated eligible voters. These varying discrepancies led to the resignation of the late commissioner Haslyn Parris, citing his inability to overlook the above-mentioned atrocities in the electoral process. Commissioner Parris on July 20 2006 told media operatives that he had chosen to formally disassociate himself from the Guyana Elections Commission. Parris said that his resignation had become imperative, since he was incapable of accepting a decision made purportedly by the Commission to announce to President Jagdeo that the Revised Electoral list was ready for printing and publishing.

It is expected, after such actions are taken, that an election date would be set. With adequate technical application of the Electoral Office of Jamaica report to the revised list of electors during the Claims and objections period, Parris explained that each individual Commissioner is required by law to sign in agreement what the Chairman approves if Dr. Surujbally thinks that he is ready to print and publish the list. I wish him to understand that is not a view I concur, Parris noted. Parris said that it was the view that the Commission would be misinforming and misleading the President, all other stakeholders, and all signatories to the Memorandum of Understanding that the Official List of Electors comprises an adequately checked, tested and confirmed list of persons eligible to vote in the 2006 Regional and General Elections. He noted that such act of misrepresentation and apparent underhandedness would exceed the level previously achieved when inordinately delayed efforts were made to advise the President of GECOM’s inability to meet the constitutional deadline of August 04, 2006 compounded with misleading information that August 31, 2006 is the date by which free and fair elections could be delivered by GECOM.
In concluding, Commissioner Parris said that his attempts to function as a commissioner have, for some time now, been conflicting with his preference Re professionalism technical correctness, intellectual honesty, straightforwardness observance of the intention of the law and avoidance of misinforming and misleading officials and the general public on matters related to the electoral process. Despite my best efforts, I have been unable to effect corrective action on all these dimensions of my concerns. My continued association, particularly with recent decisions, would conflict with all these preferences cannot in good conscience continue. Parris said that it was only around Wednesday evening at around 7 o’clock that he was informed of the intent of the Chairman Dr. Steve Surujbally, through an internal memorandum which required his response by 4pm the following day. With what transpired at the commission in 2006, the government-appointed commissioners must investigate all transaction with this present voters list.

The million-dollar question which is being asked by the electorate is whether the PPP/C did win a majority in 2006. The P.N.C, in 2006, failed to demand House-to-House verification; this must not happen in 2020.

Regards,
George Williams