Report on Elections CoI to come “in the shortest of time” – Chairman

– as public hearings wrap up

Public hearings of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (CoI) into the events that followed the March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections have concluded and according to Chairman, Justice (Ret’d) Stanley John, the report will be handed over to President Dr Irfaan Ali in the shortest possible time.
The curtains came down on the public hearings in Elections CoI on Friday. Justice John said the next step is to compile the report.
“Our next task is to set about preparing our report and that we will do with scrupulous care and fearlessly; with uppermost in our minds, principles of natural justice and the rule of law,” the CoI Chairman contended.

Justice John, a retired Justice of Appeal from the Turks and Caicos Islands, also assured that the Commission’s final report will be presented soon.
“We appreciate and understand the importance of free and fair elections. What we have seen and heard over the past several weeks, we will distil and in the shortest of time present a report to His Excellency, the President,” the Chairman stated.
Prior to wrapping up on Friday, the Commission heard closing remarks from the CoI’s Lead Counsel, Sophia Chote SC, who recapped the evidence given over the past few weeks by witnesses.
She told the three-member Commission that they have to consider the strong and serious infractions by a group of persons to subvert the “deep, democratic right” of the people of Guyana.
According to SC Chote, the highlights give an idea of the ‘sound and fury’ which naturally followed the attempts to pervert the proper course of things during the electoral process.
“I would say in closing that let’s put the sound and fury aside, now is the time for cool reasoning and cool heads and logical conclusions based on a mature analysis of the reliable body of evidence which you have before you,” she urged the CoI panel.
Last September, President Dr Irfaan Ali swore in Justice John along with former High Court Judge and Acting Justice of Appeal in the Eastern Caribbean, Godfrey P Smith, SC, and former acting Chancellor of the Judiciary in Guyana, Justice (Ret’d) Carl Singh, to probe the events that ensued after the controversial March 2020 elections.
The CoI was specifically tasked with looking into District Four (Demerara-Mahaica) – Guyana’s largest voting district, where there were blatant attempts to rig the 2020 polls in favour of the former A Partnership for National Unity/Alliance For Change (APNU/AFC) Administration.
Public Hearings commenced on November 3, 2022, and several witnesses took the stand including politicians, staff of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), ranks from the Guyana Police Force, and other stakeholders such as local observers. However, the key players fingered in the attempts to rig elections have refused to testify when they were summoned before the Commission.
The last witness to take the stand was Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister, Anil Nandlall, SC, who recalled on Thursday the series of events from the passage of the No-Confidence Motion against the APNU/AFC Government in December 2018 leading up to the swearing-in of Dr Irfaan Ali as President in August 2020.
Also on Thursday, Attorney Nigel Hughes abruptly ended his cross-examination of Government-nominated GECOM Commissioner Sase Gunraj, after a line of questioning that introduced new evidence into the CoI was not accepted.
Hughes, who is representing former Deputy Chief Elections Officer Roxanne Myers – who has been implicated by several witnesses in the ongoing CoI – was granted permission by the Commission to cross-examine witnesses despite his client opting to remain silent when she appeared before the Commission earlier this week.
Hughes began to cross-examine Gunraj on his previous testimony that Myers had blocked him from following former Returning Officer for Region Four Clairmont Mingo onto the second floor of the Ashmins Building – which was the command centre for the Elections Commission.
Under cross-examination, Gunraj noted that he had reported the incident at a subsequent meeting of the Elections Commission – to which Hughes asked whether the then DCEO was ever given an opportunity to address the allegations.
Gunraj said he could not recall. It was at this point that Hughes raised the issue of a letter that was never before admitted as evidence to the CoI.
“In a letter sent by the Commission to her (Myers), inviting her to show cause why her services should not be terminated, one of the items listed in that letter from the Commission, was the fact that she had stopped you?”
But Counsel for the CoI Sonia Chote interjected and asked that Hughes provide copies of the letter and seek to have it admitted as evidence.
Moreover, Commissioner Carl Singh reminded that “Mr Hughes is cross-examining on evidence by this witness which implicates his client. That letter, Mr Hughes, is clearly not in the evidence before us and the evidence by Mr Gunraj so far does not disclose any such letter to the Commission.”
Nevertheless, Hughes continued to question the witness but he again raised the issue of the letter – a question that was not accepted by the Commission.
Counsel Chote contended that “I don’t think that it’s fair to the witness to have him answer questions about some document, ex post facto unless we have that document.”
Commission Chair Stanley John agreed, pointing out that it is not fair to the Commissioners, since they too have not seen the document and do not know what this document is about.
But Hughes sought to defend his line of questioning.
“My understanding is if a suggestion/document is referred to a witness, if the witness accepts it in his oral testimony, we can then proceed; if he rejects it, then it doesn’t go in…,” Hughes argued, pointing out that the cross-examination had not yet reached such a stage.
“I’m merely asking him if he was a member of the Commission that had sent a letter to Miss Myers asking her to show cause.”
But the defence was still not accepted by the Commission. Hughes then informed that he would no longer be cross-examining the witness.
“Your Honour, I have to profess I’m not familiar with the protocols and procedures of the Commission, in which case, I ask that I, not go any further,” Hughes declared.