…questionable patterns observed in PPP strongholds

BRINGING forward statistics from the 2015 General and Regional Elections, the A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) has put forward that questionable voting consistencies are evident at several private residences previously used as polling stations where the opposition is now objecting to a reduction.

In a press statement on Wednesday, the APNU+AFC pointed out that the overall turnout at polling stations located at private residences in known People’s Progressive Party (PPP) areas have been “substantially and consistently higher” than the average turnout at polling stations located in public buildings.

The party has called into question the “massive fight” of the PPP regarding the reduction taken up by the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) noting such acts are “red flags” to what may have occurred in the past. The statement comes as Leader of the Opposition, Bharrat Jagdeo, has requested of GECOM that the number of polling places in areas like Mon Repos and Foulis on the East Coast of Demerara (ECD) and Kildonan and Chesney in Berbice, Corentyne be increased.

The request came after the commission made the decision to remove the number of private residences being used as polling stations due to several past and current concerns such as non-partisanship. Immediately after, the opposition took alarm, claiming that the reductions were being done in their traditional support areas, and would cause congestion on E-Day due to the number of polling stations moved to specific polling places.

The Private Sector Commission (PSC) also took it upon itself, in a press statement, to contest the reduction stating that voters may be disenfranchised as a result. Meeting with the opposition party on Tuesday, the commission agreed to address the complaints of congestion and possibly find other public places or neutral venues. Jagdeo had threatened to resort to protest action if the request was not granted and, although the commission has opted to make a compromise, the APNU+AFC called on the public to look deeper into the likely non-coincidental acts of the PPP.

LOOK FOR YOURSELVES
The 2015 Elections data put forward by the coalition party highlighted polling stations located at private residences such as Vidawattie Residence (two stations), Seodat Residence (two stations) and Omawattie Residence (two stations) in the Paradise/Foulis area, ECD.
The respective voter turnout at these private residence polling places stood at 85.6 per cent, 83.8 per cent, 85.2 per cent, 83.5 per cent, 80 per cent and 83 per cent.

Needless to say, theses polling places were won by the PPP. However, it was noted that the voter turnout in the rest of the Paradise/Foulis area won by APNU+AFC was in the 60-70 per cent range. “…the unusually high numbers for PPP at the private residences polling stations versus public building polling stations. These are red flags. How is it that polling stations located at private residences in PPP areas consistently pull larger than usual numbers than polling stations at public buildings in the same areas? How is it that the PPP is able to consistently get more votes at private residences polling stations but cannot command same at polling stations located at public buildings?” the APNU+AFC release questioned.
Additional evidence provided that two polling stations located at Tulsidai Shivprashad Residence in Enmore, EDC showed that the votes cast for APNU+AFC and PPP for both polling stations are identical.

In other words, the statistics for polling station 805: PPP – 174, APNU+AFC – 7 (voter turnout 81 per cent) and polling station 806: PPP – 174, APNU+AFC – 7 (voter turnout 81.5 per cent)
The party stated: “This is bizarre. What are the chances of identical results in two polling stations located side-by-side in the same private residence polling place in a highly-concentrated PPP area?”

The party sited several other polling stations at different private residences noting the similarities along the way. It urged the public: “Think on these things, peruse the numbers for yourself and form your own conclusions. And then ponder on why there is this massive fight by one political entity to force GECOM to return to polling stations at private residences, particularly on the East Coast of Demerara.”

MISLEADING STATEMENTS
Apart from this, the party also chastised the PSC and leaders of the PPP for what they deemed as misleading statements made in the public regarding the reduction of the use of private residences by GECOM. While the media has highlighted that the Carter Center had recommended, following the 2015 elections, that GECOM make special effort to reduce the use of private places as polling stations, the PSC casted doubt on the same. “The PSC has checked and is informed that the Carter Center in its final report, following the
2015, elections made no such recommendation and we call upon the Carter Center to immediately, publicly make the centre’s position clear on this matter,” the PSC stated on Monday.

Jagdeo too claimed on Tuesday, that the Carter Center had said nothing of the sort. However, the APNU+AFC excerpts from pages 77 and 94 of the Carter Center 2015 report on the General and Regional Elections in Guyana showed otherwise. “The APNU+AFC Campaign calls attention to the many misleading statements by leaders of the PPP and the Chairman of the Private Sector Commission regarding the use of private residences as places of polls for the upcoming general and regional elections in Guyana,” the release stated.

Speaking on the matter of private building and residences, the centre’s report had stated, “the Carter Center recommends that GECOM take steps in future elections to ensure that citizens can cast their ballots in a neutral environment free from intimidation”. Much worse than “intimidation” has taken place in the past as following the close of polls at the 2015 Elections. Civil unrest flared in ‘C’ Field, Sophia with the burning of vehicles outside the home of Pastor, Narine Khublall. Residents at the time were convinced that Khublall – a staunch PPP/C supporter – was storing ballot boxes on his premises. The Guyana Police Force (GPF), Guyana Defence Force (GDF) and the Guyana Fire Service (FS) were called to the scene to calm the high emotions of electors who felt that their democratic right was being violated.