With some hiccups, the long-awaited National Recount began yesterday (Wednesday) morning. It is arguably the single most important activity happening in Guyana at the moment. As expected, all eyes are on the process, to ensure that it is credible and transparent. Nothing must be left to chance this time around, since the country’s future depends on what happens in the next few days.
Getting to this stage was an extremely difficult process, with many stumbling blocks being put in the way. There were quite a few legal challenges and other deliberate attempts to deny the voters, and the nation as a whole, from having a National Recount. After the various stakeholders relentlessly pursued their case for a recount, the nation is now finally at a stage where citizens have another opportunity to see their votes being counted in a transparent manner.
The Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), Justice Claudette Singh, must now take a stand against elements who are bent on disrupting the process. She must reject any attempts by elements to operate outside of the Representation of the Peoples Act and the Recount Order itself.
Following the massive negative publicity she faced for her action or inaction in relation to attempts by Clairmont Mingo, in collusion with others, to declare fraudulent results for District Four, Justice Singh has another opportunity to stand up to her words: that she will do what is required to ensure the recount process is carried out in a transparent and expeditious manner. More importantly, this is her chance to rebuild her image and change the negative perception many have of her at the moment.
With the recount ongoing, Justice Singh has a duty to seriously monitor and intervene in the process whenever necessary, by taking corrective actions and to see the process through to its finality. Already, we are seeing some concerns being expressed, which she must address immediately to allay the fears of all stakeholders.
One commissioner expressed concerns about the layouts and footprints of counting stations at the ACCC, which he said is preventing stakeholders and observers from satisfactory direct observation and verification of the recount process. He also explained that the presence of the screen to project the packages, ballots and other materiel does not really help, because the fixed camera capture area is relatively small to ascertain the true condition of packages, ballots and the storage or fate of all items received and processed. He called for an urgent review of the operational setting and methodology in place, in order to allay concerns and to deliver a recount process which meets high levels of transparency in all respects.
One party leader also expressed fear over what he calls “chain of custody” of the Statements of Recount (SoRs), saying that there is a high possibility for persons to alter the figures on the documents, even though they carry the signatures of party agents. He reminded the nation of what occurred previously, when the figures on the Statements of Poll (SoPs) for District Four were altered to show inflated figures in favour of the APNU/AFC, even though the documents contained the signatures of the various party agents. The Chair must take urgent action to protect the integrity of the SoRs, since it is from these that the final results would be tabulated.
Important to note also is that, from what we have seen so far, there are being raised all sorts of issues which do not fall under the purview of a vote recount. This, we know, is deliberate, as it has a direct relation to the push by Commissioner Vincent Alexander and others to have an ‘audit’, instead of a recount. However, GECOM cannot legally audit itself.
One legal expert argued that to engage in anything except a recount of the ballots allows Alexander and company to raise all manner of issues relating to the Official List of Electors (OLE) and voters; and with no dispute resolution protocol in place, the recount process would be rendered paralysed.
In any case, when the matter regarding the elections recount first surfaced, it was meant to do just that – a recount of the votes. No one ever called for an audit. It was the understanding of all the stakeholders, including the Court, the international community and observers, that a recount of the votes was needed in order to arrive at credible elections results, which would be accepted by all parties, and which could stand scrutiny of the international community and international observers. The nation expects Madam Chair to take a stand for what is right and in the interest of our democracy.
