Keith Lowenfield
More than 16 months after the May 11, 2015 General and Regional Elections and six months after the historic Local Government Elections, the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) is still to produce a report, including statements of expenditures on the conduct of the elections, and opposition commissioners are complaining of reaching a “brick wall” when they ask for these reports.
Speaking to reporters Thursday at his party’s Freedom House, Robb Street, Georgetown, Headquarters, People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) Commissioner, Attorney Sase Gunraj is now questioning why Chief Elections Officer, Keith Lowenfield, has been reluctant to produce these reports, particularly in face of the recent allegations of a multimillion-dollar corruption scheme at the electoral oversight body.
Gunraj said that to date, the Commission has not received from the GECOM Secretariat a report on the 2015 elections nor the 2016 Local Government Elections, despite repeated calls by commissioners.
He said one of the excuses coming from Lowenfield, whose statutory responsibility is to produce the report, is that he will not produce any report in the 2015 elections since the outcome of those elections are engaging the attention of the court.
Gunraj said the commission had discussed this issue extensively and a compromise position was considered, which would see the aspects of the report which may engage the court be redacted or excluded from the report.
“One aspect that we demanded that cannot in anyway be deemed to be affecting the outcome or otherwise even the evidence is the financial aspect,” he said, but even that is being stonewalled by the CEO.
Gunraj said with recent exposures that there is deep-rooted corruption at GECOM, one would be led to wonder if this is in anyway influencing Lowenfield’s position.
“The recent developments in the press with what has been going on with these audit reports that we have been reading…is now making us wonder why we can’t even get a financial report of the 2015 elections of the 2016 elections. In fact so far as it relates to the 2016 elections, there is absolutely no impediment, none whatsoever, in relation to the preparation and release of a report in that regard,” the attorney stated.
Radio fiasco
Weighing in on the ongoing revelations of a multimillion-dollar Communication Radio contract which is said to be shrouded in corruption, Gunraj who has been on the Commission since February 3, 2015, said that there was never any mention of the procurement or intended use of these radios prior to the elections.
“At not one single meeting any discussion was raised in relation to the procurement, use or any other matter whatsoever touching on or concerning radio, even when the issue of communication was tangentially dealt with at Commission meeting, even prior to the 2015 elections. It had not even become apparent to me sitting at that Commission that we had procured radios, that radios were intended for use or any such thing,” Gunraj stated.
He said with regards to the procurement of $14 million worth of pliers and nippers by the Commission, the same obtained.
GECOM earlier this month was caught in a web of corruption allegations surrounding the purchase of the radios from Mobile Authority, a company owned by a Water Street, Georgetown, businessman, while side-lining Barrett Communications, the manufacturer of the said radio sets.
Barrett subsequently distanced itself from the radio sets and highlighted that it had ceased production of that particular equipment since 2009, six years before they were purchased by GECOM.
More allegations
Subsequently, reports surfaced that the Commission doled out close to $100 million to M-Tech Business Solutions, another company owned by the same Water Street businessman, this time for the supply of toners used for photocopiers and printers, office furniture and equipment, photo paper and scanners, printing accessories, and even Duracell batteries. Additionally, the Commission is accused of purchasing the whopping $14 million in nippers from another relative of the same businessman.
GECOM officials, including the Chairman and CEO, have refused to comment on the allegations.
