Dear Editor
The Stabroek News, June 26 story titled, “Lowenfield report seen as clear act of insubordination.” a section, of which described the Chief Elections Officer, Keith Lowenfield, as having flouted the Constitutional requirements; that he should only act in conformity with the laws, and that his action is a “clear act of insubordination’’, Guyana Chronicle, June 27, “CEO stands by report on valid votes’’.

For want of an appropriate description, this latest miasmic content from the Stabroek News is essential MEDIA SLEAZE, which has become the common print fare, not dissimilar, of also the other two anti-coalition newsprints. But it is wholly dishonest, opportunistic and dishonest. In fact, it has sought to highlight the fact of the GECOM Chair, instructing the CEO to prepare the statistical content that had been the numerical count for declaration.
Of course, Mr. Lowenfield did, as instructed; except that those figures were already proven fraudulent, a fact which he had already detailed in a previous report, as is his Constitutional right and mandate. In fact, this must be one of the few occasions which such an instruction would have had to originate from the Chair, though one believes that a former CEO had detailed his being instructed to write and re-write SOPs during the tabulation process of the controversial 1997 general elections, which the current Chair, then as sitting Judge, had to vitiate.

Therefore, the issue of insubordination did not arise, since the CEO was in fact being made to carry out an instruction which had been contra to what his Constitutional order should have been. Further, it would seem that the Stabroek News by its stated trash, is in fact, suggesting that the CEO, even in light of the Appeal Court’s decision as to the definition of what “more votes cast’’ mean, which meant that he then had to obey such an Order regarding the new understanding, if not, the new meaning of Article 177(2) b of the Constitution, which meant VALID VOTES. This would have required an entirely new report to now properly reflect, not only in congruent with what he had stated in his initial report to the Chair, but now commanded that his tabulation for declaratory purposes for the results of March 2 polls, BE ABOUT VALID VOTES. And this was, and still is, his CONSTITUTIONAL PREROGATIVE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH Article 177 (2). This has never been altered or changed, as far as is known.

So here again, is another dishonest narrative, similar to all the others which deceptively seeks to obfuscate the fact of the Court of Appeal ‘s ruling, by disingenuously CLOUDING THE FACT OF THE COURT’S RULING; WHAT IT SUBSEQUENTLY SIGNALLED FOR THE CEO, WHICH REPORTS WOULD RENDER THE FRAUDULENT NUMERICAL RECOUNT, NULL AND VOID. IT NOW HAD TO BE ABOUT VALD VOTES, AS MANDATED BY THE COURT. For such to have been disobeyed, would have been contempt, even against the laws of natural justice. And certainly, CEO Lowenfield, the professional that he is, would not have done otherwise.
Let us understand this much about the Stabroek News: It daily publishing content continues, like the other pro-opposition media, to disseminate a narrative that is dishonest in every way. This publishing house is no longer a traditional media entity; instead, it is a repository of the now misinformation and fake news. It has been stone silence on the avalanche of fraud found – this coming from a print house that had been quick to publish a page one comment which suggested ‘’rigging’’ when President Granger decided on the choice of the retd. Justice James Patterson as the then GECOM Chair.

This underlines the media fraud of what is NOW the Stabroek News. It is a dishonesty that knows no bounds as it continues to support an open assault on the integrity of the State, and its institutions, especially GECOM and the role of the CEO, WHO, AS HE HAS SO CORRECTLY DESCRIBED HIMSELF AS A CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICER.
For all the lies which Stabroek News HAS BEEN PEDDLING, AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO – IT CANNOT CHANGE SUCH A FACT.
Regards
Aditya Panday