Dear Editor,
In the interest of fairness and transparency, the Chairman of GECOM should not allow any person to be caught by surprise, be disadvantaged, or squeezed by the contracting timelines of the apparently sinister plot.
It seems that several considered factors are contributing elements to the outlined reactions. Standing out is the significant organisational strength of the People’s Progressive Party as the most popular political party in Guyana, and the relationship this has with strong, positive development programme, which overwhelms by far the fragmented approach of its distant coalition competitor.
Further, the PPP’s magnificent performance at the 2016 Local Government Elections still looms as a major threat. Historically, The PPP had always humiliated the PNC at the Village Council Elections; and, in 1970, the PNC resorted to massive rigging, which led to a substantial boycott. 2016, the PPP/C swept the polls again, winning seven of the ten administrative regions and forty-eight of the Neighbourhood Democratic Councils.
For obvious reasons, this magnificent record will continue to get better at the November 12, 2018 LGE.
The People’s National Congress took power in 1964 with a coalition Government, and after using the United Force, they kicked them out of power. Rigged Elections were the order of the day, and the 1980 Paramountcy of the Party approach was utilised to suppress the holding of Local Government Elections. It should not be forgotten that the PNC, in desperation, did everything possible to postpone LGE year after year.
Former President Mr. Desmond Hoyte subsequently agreed to set up a special ‘task force’ to address the numerous complaints, but the PNC representatives did everything to frustrate the completion of the work of the task force. As a consequence, the Eighth Parliament set up a special select committee to look at Local Government Reforms. That Special Select Committee’s work was extended to the Ninth and Tenth Parliaments, hence paving the way for LGE in 2016. The elections were held but were never completed.
While we have serious concerns about the demarcation of the constituency boundaries, we must also be very serious about the recruitment of the staff at GECOM. PNC Commissioner Vincent Alexander’s comments lend no objectivity to an unbiased approach. It is crystal clear that the GECOM Secretariat does not constitute the Commission; neither do the three PNC Commissioners and the Chairman. It is therefore critical that all and sundry recognise the constitutionally appointed six Commissioners and the Chairman (rtd.) Patterson, who are the people with the responsibilities for GECOM.
It is known that the PPP/C and many other stakeholders are against this capriciously vindictive and provocative action. I also advocate for objective consultations and the full involvement of all the Commissioners in every aspect of GECOM’s work. We need to see that GECOM be transparent, accountable, and win the trust of our people.
Sincerely,
Neil Kumar
