The APNU/AFC’s illegal grab for power has landed Guyana in the political mess and uncertainty it is in at the moment. Even in the height of this uncertainty, President David Granger has remained silent and from all indications has not changed his position to concede defeat and allow the PPP/C, who are the legitimate winners of the elections, to be sworn in.
It was reported that President Desi Bouterse of Suriname has conceded defeat at the country’s recent General Elections for the sake of allowing his country to move forward in order to achieve its developmental aims. The polls were held on May 25, and the results were already declared and accepted by all parties without any violence or judicial intervention.
But here in Guyana, it is quite the opposite. In fact, there are last-minute desperate attempts by the coalition, working in collusion with elements in the electoral machinery, to defy all logic, break all the laws and go against the expressed will of the people to declare elections results which are not credible.
President Granger’s APNU/AFC coalition has tightened its grip on power even though the results of a national recount have confirmed that the ruling party was massively defeated by over 15,000 votes. In fact, we had reported before that President Granger’s party was defeated, not once, but twice – first in a no-confidence vote in the Parliament in December 2018 and then at the March 2 national elections.
After prolonging the elections for more than a year following the no-confidence vote, the elections were finally held in March. It is now close to four months since the electorate voted, but credible results are yet to be declared even though they are widely known and certified by all stakeholders, including the parties themselves, and local and international observers.
Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), Justice Claudette Singh last Tuesday voted to use the results from the national recount and have the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) declared the winner of the 2020 General and Regional Elections. But moments before Chief Elections Officer Keith Lowenfield was set to present his report to the Commission for final declaration, coalition supporter Eslyn David moved to the Court of Appeal to block the Commission from declaring the results.
Following the Court’s ruling on Monday in relation to its jurisdiction to hear the case brought by David, seeking to block the official declaration of the March 2 polls, some coalition leaders conveniently interpreted the ruling to mean that it was a “victory” for the party and convinced their supporters to believe so too.
However, what the coalition is essentially saying is that it is quite acceptable for the Chief Elections Officer to discard thousands of votes which they claim to be “invalid” based on unsubstantiated allegations. It must be reminded that at a meeting of June 18 GECOM, through Chairperson Justice Claudette Singh, a unanimous decision was made that the Commission cannot deal with the issue of credibility of an election. This is a matter for the High Court through an elections petition after the results have been declared and a President is sworn in.
In any case, the Commission had already, during the recount process, determined the validity of the votes and Lowenfield has already been directed to go and total those valid votes and prepare the requisite statutory forms.
For emphasis sake, we wish to point out that during the recount exercise, the valid votes in each ballot box were totalled and placed upon a Statement of Recount. Each Statement of Recount in each Electoral District was then tabulated by GECOM staff, resulting in the end, the total valid votes for each Electoral District, which was certified, again, by GECOM staff.
These total valid votes were then tabulated by the Chief Elections Officer and presented to the Commission on June 13 as the total valid votes cast for the Regional Elections and total valid votes cast for the National Eections, showing the total valid votes received by each political party. The Commission then further directed the Chief Elections Officer to prepare his report in accordance with Article 177 of the Constitution and Section 96 of the Representation of the People Act, using these aggregate valid votes which he already tabulated and submitted to the Commission.
We insist that the Chief Elections Officer must carry out the directions of the Commission under both the law and the Constitution. He is required to only use valid votes generated under the national recount exercise as the basis for preparing his reports. Anything outside of this would be unlawful and could result in even more political chaos.
