TODAY, Monday, July 29, 2024, marks the commencement of the trial for nine individuals accused of electoral fraud, in a case that has captured national attention.

The defendants, including prominent political figures and former election officials, face charges related to alleged manipulations and irregularities during the 2020 general elections.

This morning, the prosecution team led by King’s Counsel, Darshan Ramdhani, is set to present evidence in the case that is expected to be closely watched.

The State has already handed over, to the defence, flash drives containing certified copies of Statements of Poll (SoPs) and Statements of Recount (SoRs), witness statements from 80 persons along with video interviews. Several bundles of documents were also disclosed.

Among those to take the witness stand are Minister of Local Government and Regional Development Sonia Parag; Head of the Diaspora Unit, Rosalinda Rasul; Forensic Investigator, Rawle Nedd and former Region Four (Demerara-Mahaica) Police Commander, Edgar Thomas.

Charged are People’s National Congress/Reform (PNC/R) activist, Carol Smith-Joseph; former Health Minister under the A Partnership for National Unity+Alliance for Change (APNU+AFC) government, Volda Lawrence; former Chief Elections Officer (CEO) at the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), Keith Lowenfield; former Deputy CEO, Roxanne Myers; former District Four (Demerara-Mahaica) Returning Officer, Clairmont Mingo; and GECOM employees Sheffern February, Enrique Livan, Denise Babb-Cummings, and Michelle Miller.

They are accused of a number of offences, including misconduct in public office, uttering forged documents, and plotting to deceive the electors of Guyana by declaring a false account of votes.

It is alleged that the defendants inflated or facilitated the inflation of results for Region Four, the country’s largest voting district, to give the APNU+AFC coalition a majority win at the March 2020 elections, when, in fact, the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) had won by over 15,000 votes. All the defendants are on cash bail pending the hearing and determination of their matters.

The high-profile case, which was stagnant before the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts for almost four years, can now proceed after a recent ruling by Chief Justice Roxane George, SC.

In the ruling, Chief Justice George dismissed an application by one of Lowenfield, Myers and Mingo’s attorneys, Nigel Hughes, in which he contended that Section 140 (2) of the Representation of the People Act (RoPA) which prohibits disclosure of GECOM meetings, is unconstitutional because it infringes upon his client’s constitutional right to a fair trial.

Justice George ruled that the constitutional challenge was unfounded and that the trial should proceed. She, among other things, decided that RoPA, which forbids the revelation of GECOM communications, would not infringe upon the constitutional rights of the trio.

The trial was initially scheduled to begin on March 4, 2024 but that day, Hughes made a last-minute request for GECOM’s minutes for the election period, and proof of the Commission’s decisions. He had submitted that even though these records are essential to support the case of his clients—especially Lowenfield, Myers, and Mingo—GECOM is not allowed to disclose them according to Section 140 (2) of RoPA. Therein reads: “No evidence of any deliberations of the Elections Commission or communications between members of the Commission regarding its business shall be admissible in court.”

Hughes had argued that Mingo, Myers, and Lowenfield were “directed” to carry out specific decisions made by GECOM, such as “posting of results on spreadsheets.”

He had stated that these records are required for cross-examination in the event he or other defence lawyers wish to refute the testimony of the GECOM commissioners and GECOM Chairperson, retired Justice Claudette Singh, who are also prosecution witnesses.

SENSITIVE ISSUES

Lead prosecutor King’s Counsel Darshan Ramdhani had responded to Hughes by emphasising that there is legislation preventing the disclosure of the documentation and that the prosecution does not have the information Hughes is demanding.

He had reasoned that since elections are essential to a democratic society and the topics discussed by GECOM are sensitive, their release is prohibited by law.

He had said that Hughes only submitted a request for the records on February 28, 2024, despite the Chief Magistrate having ordered disclosure in the case more than two years ago.

In light of this, Ramdhani had asked the magistrate to reject Hughes’ last-minute request for the documents, characterising it as a frivolous attempt to further delay the start of the trial.

The King’s Counsel had called Hughes’ statement that his clients were directed to use spreadsheets “most startling” because, according to him, the Chief Justice had issued an order banning the use of spreadsheets for election results computation. He had pointed out that GECOM had not announced that spreadsheets will be used to tabulate votes.

After considering submissions from both sides, Magistrate Daly referred the issue to the High Court for it to rule on the constitutionality of Section 140 (2) of RoPA. As such, the proceedings before her were placed on hold pending the Chief Justice’s ruling.

The APNU+AFC Coalition received 171,825 votes, while the PPP/C received 166,343 votes, according to former CEO Lowenfield’s election report. However, it was evident from the official findings of the recount process, which was supervised by GECOM and a high-level Caribbean Community (CARICOM) team that the coalition had received 217,920 votes, while the PPP/C had received 233,336 votes, which was enough to win.

In order to help the APNU+AFC caretaker administration stay in power, Mingo and the other defendants, allegedly inflated the results in Region Four, the largest voting region in Guyana, as the recount process also revealed. In August 2021, GECOM made the decision to sack Lowenfield, Myers, and Mingo. Following the filing of charges against the defendants in late 2020, there have been multiple delays in the start of the trial, primarily due to requests from the defence.

Attorney General Anil Nandlall, SC had previously called the constant delays a “travesty,” pointing out that the charges are still pending and that a whole election cycle will shortly conclude.