We condemn these scurrilous attacks on the GECOM Chair

Dear Editor,

It seems to have become the norm that individuals and organizations that take actions or make statements which appear to be averse to the rigging agenda are subject to various kinds of attacks.

Recently, the vilest attacks have been directed towards Justice Claudette Singh, Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission, presumably for the firm stance she has taken in rejecting the fraudulent reports presented and insisting that only the recount figures be presented to the Commission for the purposes of a declaration of final elections results.

While Commissioners may not always agree with the Chairman, she has always discharged her duties with professionalism,

declaration on the basis of “valid votes”, i.e., not the recount. And then he revealed the possible purpose of the delay. The state newspaper quoted him as saying: “The APNU+AFC Coalition, in the national interest, and with a view to maintaining stability and peace, remains open to dialogue with other political parties and stakeholders on the way forward for our country. The APNU+AFC Coalition is prepared to act responsibly to bring a resolution to the ongoing political situation.”

Now whether this is just a ruse in order to cover themselves if they do go the route of more extreme measures so they then can claim that the other political parties refused to negotiate, or whether they are serious, presumably only time will tell. If they are serious, then what exactly do they have in mind? In this connection there was the a few days ago reporting on a mysterious group which has created the ‘Guyana Renewal Project’ which proposes a period of shared governance to allow for constitutional reform.

Since the state newspaper is sometimes used as a political pool by whoever is in office into which a pebble can be dropped to see if it causes ripples, it may be that this ‘story’ had been deliberately placed. It is significant, for example, that no one either locally or in the diaspora was named in connection with the group. However, in an echo of Mr Harmon, it was reported that the objective was to spark dialogue and find a solution to ‘Guyana’s current political crisis.’ Against this, however, it has to be remembered that the is under the direct control of Prime Minister Nagamootoo, so it could conceivably be one of his flights of fancy.

In fairness, however, in his column ‘My Turn’ he too reflects Mr Harmon’s new line, writing, “Today, we have returned to the past, or what V.S. Naipaul described as “the bend in the river”. The most difficult political challenges are ahead. For this, Guyana needs engagement, not isolation: Not sanctions. The leaders have to come to the table and work out a post-election détente. The time for this is now!”

Whatever the status of the enigmatic group, the proposals as reported are quite complicated. Even if they are to be taken seriously, any temporary arrangements as conceived by them, or by Mr Harmon and his party, or by anyone else, would first require Parliament to be convened if they are to come within the ambit of the Constitution. And for the National Assembly to meet there would have to be a declaration of results in the first instance, and the swearing in of a president in the second. And that is exactly what the de facto President and APNU+AFC are trying so hard to avoid.

Where the group’s proposals are concerned, why convene Parliament just to put in place temporary arrangements under which the Constitution would be changed? There is already a Standing Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Reform, which could set to work straight away.

Be that as it may, if Mr Harmon’s plan is to negotiate

fairness and impartiality, and in keeping with the tenets of the Constitution and other legal provisions.

We unreservedly condemn these scurrilous attacks on the Chairman and call upon those engaged in such conduct, including senior members of the APNU+AFC, a contestant in these elections, to cease and desist from so doing.

Yours faithfully,

Sase Gunraj

Robeson Benn

Bibi Shadick Commissioners GECOM

with the opposition, exactly what is it he is seeking to negotiate? The parliamentary conundrum is perhaps what prompted Mr Vincent Alexander at an earlier stage to muse about no declaration, a new voters’ list and a new election. It is not a suggestion which will go anywhere, because firstly, the Gecom Chair has indicated there will be a declaration based on the recount, and secondly, leaving Mr Granger in place while a new voters’ list is drawn up will be unacceptable both to the opposition and the new parties, not to mention the international community. Furthermore, no one except APNU+AFC will justify going for a new election and bypassing the current one, which all observers, both local and foreign, have deemed free and fair.

So the de facto government is back to square one. It is in the same position it has been in for the last few months. It either accepts a declaration based on the recount, and then goes for an election petition (true to form, the has already carried a piece on why election petitions are not a favoured route for political parties), or it holds onto power by force. If the latter, then the sanctions so lightly dismissed by Mr Nagamootoo come into play. Significantly, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has already announced the withdrawal of visas for those undermining democracy in this country, and has indicated that this could be extended to their families.

A withdrawal of visas for senior GDF officers as well as, possibly, for some in the police force is likely to follow anything that has the patina of a formal coup, and would undoubtedly extend to family members as well. Considering that so many Guyanese have relatives in the US, it would be a severe blow. While the officers themselves might be prepared to tolerate it, they would come under great pressure from their families. Their lack of enthusiasm for any form of recklessness, in consequence, may not be reassuring for the clique circulating in and around State House.

The difficulty for the de facto President is that since so much time has passed, he has a great deal of face to lose. As such, he will not want to be seen as having been humiliated; if he thinks he has been it will just make him more obdurate. There is little that can be done about this, since it is of his own creation, although it can be impressed upon the opposition that there should be no triumphalism and that anything coming out of Freedom House should be very carefully worded. In the end, however, this is not about Mr Granger’s loss of face; it is about the nation’s future.