Latest update February 22nd, 2025 2:00 PM
Jun 10, 2009 News
…we will only respond when they are ready to talk with us – Sukhai
Minister of Amerindian Affairs, Pauline Sukhai, yesterday lauded the recent countrywide Toshaos elections in some 132 titled communities save for one constituency where she said that the supporters of a candidate who was deemed unqualified to contests have become disgruntled and have resorted to redress at the wrong forum.
She was speaking to the elections held at Potaro/Siparuta where it was charged that John King did not satisfy the residential requirements and had to be disqualified and the members of what she called the disgruntled group have resorted to the Alliance for Change in the form of the party’s chairman Khemraj Ramjattan.
Sukhai blasted the AFC for leading in the sensationalising of issues of one community that “has a small group of disgruntled people.”
It must be pointed out however that despite his elected role Ramjattan was approached as an attorney-at-law given that it was the use of the Amerindian Act that is in question.
According to Sukhai, she was in receipt of complaints from the winning side and a compliment via Ramjattan from the “disgruntled” side.
“In any electoral process there will always be some section of the electorate that will want to raise issue about something that they feel did not go in their favour.”
The Minister said that to date she has not been in receipt of a direct or formal complaint for the losing team lead by one John King pointing out that the Ministry has a forum available for exactly such complaints.
“Unfortunately, the disgruntled group from Orealla has not seen it fit to come first to the Minister.”
She said that the group has instead resorted to protests.
Sukhai was referring to a group of Orealla residents, including King, who traveled to the capital city and picketed the Ministry of Amerindian Affairs mere hours prior to the Minister’s comments.
“We will only respond when they are ready to talk with us,” said Sukhai
She emphasised that the Ministry was planning to examine the matter. Under the legislation there is a three-month grace period after the election to raise issues, complaints and queries to be addressed.
“We have time legally under the Act to deal with it…We will be dealing with the matter but we have to allow due process to be followed.”
According to some of the residents in the community who have since
retained the service of Ramjattan, the Elections held on April 28, last, was held in breach of many of the rules provided under the Law.
According to Ramjattan, the deeming of John King, one of the candidates, ineligible to contest for the Chairmanship on Election Day, when on Nomination day, April 27, he was ruled eligible, by itself is sufficient to vitiate the elections and is good reason to hold fresh elections.
The triennial elections were ordered by Sukhai and according to Ramjattan, for such an order to have been issued would have meant that preliminary requirements would have been in place.
According to Ramjattan, the preliminary requirements were not in place, “and their absences obviously constitute irregularities.”
Ramjattan pointed out that under the legislation, there is a 60-day rule that will allow the compilation of the Electoral List. The time is also used to display the list at the Village Office to give time to voters to object to those names that ought not to be there, and for those to be enlisted who were not on this list. Darrel Devoir, the incumbent chairman’s grandson, and Roger Peneux, started a compilation on March 6, 2009 and Ingrid Devoir, the incumbent chairman’s grand-daughter, displayed the Electoral List on March 12, last.
According to Ramjattan, a number of eligible voters, including King, were not on that list. He pointed out that the list was subsequently amended to include King’s name among others.
“Had there been the required 60-day notification, more persons would have been enlisted. This is so because of the heavy movement in and out of that village for employment purposes.
Ramjattan also noted that the Returning Officer has to give the Village Council 35 days’ notice of the date the Elections will be held, hours and location when voting will take place.
“This was not done. What happened was that one week before the elections; an official from the Region Six Democratic Council, went into the Village and informed the villagers of the set date for the elections”.
On Nomination Day, John King and Chairman McLean Devoir were upheld as eligible candidates for the Chairman/Toshao position.
McLean Devoir had objected to John King on grounds that he, John King, was not resident in Orealla.
John King defended his residency status and it was openly determined and publicly declared at that meeting that John King was eligible to contest.
The election objection was made by Mr. Mc Lean Devoir and a number of his team’s supporting Councillors. They posited that John King should not be eligible by virtue of not being a resident for three years prior to Nomination Day.
This newspaper has been reliably informed, that the Amerindian Affairs Minister had also obtained a legal interpretation in favour of King as it relates to his eligibility based on his residency status.
“I am available and am prepared to assist in any effort to see that democracy is restored in our Amerindian Communities of Orealla and Siparuta, and in our beloved country…We had fought together for this,” said Ramjattan.
Feb 22, 2025
Kaieteur Sports- Slingerz FC made a bold statement at the just-concluded Guyana Energy Conference and Supply Chain Expo, held at the Marriott Hotel, by blending the worlds of professional football...Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- Time, as the ancients knew, is a trickster. It slips through the fingers of kings and commoners... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Ambassador to the US and the OAS, Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News-Two Executive Orders issued by U.S.... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]