Dear Editor,

SINCE March 2, 2020, there has been much activity around the Recount Process. There are questions of its legality, and some see it as an act of commitment and good faith by His Excellency, President David Granger. The Recount Process was gazette, and all political parties were getting into gear; GECOM itself had to be in a state of readiness. In any electoral process, only a simpleton or persons not committed to fairness would negate or purposefully avoid the embrace of Credibility of the electoral process. And so, in a decision to embark on a Recount, the simpleton’s view is irrelevant and cannot be considered.
So what are the principles which should guide this process? First and foremost, it is the Legal framework under which the election was conducted; that framework has provided GECOM with the power to conduct the process, ensure the credibility and integrity of the process, and declare the results of the process. These are very important processes which must be operationalised by well-trained and committed persons; persons who are not easily corrupted should be identified as part of the process, because there are a number of processes which would allow the Guyanese citizenry to conclude whether the process is wholesome, with credibility and integrity. Much of what which must be followed by the staff of GECOM and the citizens is clearly defined in the Law, or the Administrative Manuals of GECOM. For example, all statutory documents must be placed in each Ballot Box before being sealed. Clearly, there is a reason why this is required; there is no room for the description of violation of the process as an anomaly or an irregularity. In the electoral process, the violation of these processes is fraudulent. In the words of the Former Attorney-General, Mr. Anil Nandall, “Fraud is fraud, and everything committed or tainted by fraud makes it a nullity Ab initio.” When the process, as defined, is not met in part or in the whole, how can anyone accept that all the processes related to the Box bears an iota of credibility and integrity. When a Box arrives without documents, in many instances, it is only the simpleton or the intellectual retard that would not understand that credibility and integrity has been trampled on. My count shows that approximately 11 to 12 enveloppes should be placed in the Ballot Box before it is sealed; had this Recount Agreement not taken place, fraudulent violations would not have come to the fore.

This basic understanding of the principles of credibility and integrity, and the compromise by fraudulent actions seem to knowingly escape the intellectual capacity and understanding of the Heads of Embassies and Missions accredited to the Cooperative Republic of Guyana, a Sovereign State, who have also been accredited Observer Status to our elections on March 2, 2020. Their so-called admonitions and veiled threats to the country, and most of all to our Head of State, is out of character with the normal behaviour of members of the Diplomatic Corps. Their apparent lack of timing of their comments show disregard and disrespect. There can be difference, but there are processes by which one would expect them to voice their difference; that locus is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Before these Heads of Mission arrived in Guyana, their details were presented by their governments to the Government and People of Guyana. After due consideration, they were accepted, and they presented their credentials. Now they have conducted themselves, not as diplomats but as part of a Mafia linked to Race, Power, Economics and Politics, disregarding the need to ensure that our electoral process is one of credibility and integrity. Our Head of State has been tolerant, since, in many other jurisdictions, a decision would have been made for them to be recalled. As Observers, their behaviour has been out of step with the norm. When the world is crying out for human justice, where are the voices of these Representatives speaking to the disenfranchisement of voters in Georgia and Wisconsin; vote-rigging in Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania etc; voter-suppression in other jurisdictions. They speak of credibility, but are unable to define the elements of same, which are defined in our laws and administrative procedures. So I say to these Diplomats, and all Observers, you have got to be like Caesar’s wife, and your comments need to be studied and evidenced-based, so that, as a people, we can respect you. Guyana has had years of association with your countries, and hence we hold no major difference with your country, but their departure from the behavioural norms of diplomats.

In any electoral process, there are two phases: (1) The Qualitative phase, the elements of which speak to the Credibility and integrity of the process; (2) the Quantitative or numerical phase. The qualitative influences the second. And the words of Anil Nandall ring through and true. Hence an iota of fraud compromises the credibility and integrity of the first phase, and hence voids the second phase. Also in a country where the voting pattern is racially charged, one cannot risk the acceptance of descriptions of anomalies and irregularities.

Lastly, I have been puzzled by the behaviour of a former Minister, Kit Nascimento, who saw it fit while describing the security personnel of our Head of State to likening it to Idi Amin’s. I want to say to Mr. Nascimento that in the world today, the slogan ‘Black lives Matter’ is not singularly about the survival of Black people, but also about the respect for Black people and all Guyanese. He should know better, and by his comments, he not only disrespected President Granger as a Black man, but he also disrespected the office of Head of State. As Guyanese, of all the issues we must address is the issue which has eluded us, and failed to confront is that of RACE .

Regards,

Richard Van West-Charles