There was nothing democratic about PNCR’s election – Solomon

Aug 05, 2014 News

---

By Abena Rockcliffe

Region 10 Member of the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR), Sharma Solomon, a week after the conclusion of the party’s 18th biennial congress, has stated that there was nothing democratic about the electoral process.
Solomon released a statement to this effect yesterday and while he did not state definitively the lack of democracy in the election process, the series of events outlined by the politician pointed to that.
Solomon said that for any evaluation of the PNC/R electoral processes to be deemed credible, it has to be guided by the Party’s rules and corresponding action or inaction by those involved. He said that this would be a guide to learn where the Party went wrong and what can be done to avoid re-occurrences.
Solomon opined that with the PNC/R being a Party vying for the seat of government, it should stick to the philosophy of its founder Leader Forbes Burnham; which is that “there is no better way of leading than by example.”
Speaking to specific issues, Solomon said that he is aware of a Linden membership of 805.
He said that 805 new application and renewal forms were completed and submitted with fees attached.
According to Solomon, these forms were submitted by him and MP Vanessa Kissoon over a period of time and the receipts are available for verification/perusal.
He said that to become a member of a group and delegate to congress, an individual is required to prove his/her bona fide status by having in possession a prescribed membership card.
He noted that as per Party’s policy, eligibility as a delegate is determined by financial standing for at least two years within the Congress period. In 2014 this would mean being a member for 2012/2013 and 2013/2014.
Solomon informed that by way of a letter sent to the secretariat, in his then capacity as Central Executive Member and member of the Accreditation Committee, he urged the issuance of cards for members and volunteered his time to be part of the process in bringing this to fruition.
He said however that there was no acknowledgement of the letter or acceptance of offer; but noted that efforts overtime to have membership verified were met with some success.
Solomon said that in some instances, delegates were named by the secretariat via correspondence sent to him when it is really the responsibility of the groups to decide on their representatives.
Solomon said that on March 19, Linden representatives (himself and Kissoon) were summoned to Congress Place for a meeting.
According to him, at this meeting, the Region’s representatives were instructed to configure all Linden party groups based on the national electoral boundary lines. He said that Linden complied with the directive.
Solomon disclosed that at a subsequent meeting for all regional groups, it was learnt that the configuration of groups based on boundary lines was a requirement the secretariat made only of Linden.
Solomon said that subsequently, and without consultation with leaders of the Linden groups and the regional leadership, the secretariat “apparently aided by others” dismantled the original groups which would be those formed on boundary lines.
The politician said that this reconfiguration resulted in members being moved into groups that were not in existence before and without their knowledge or approval.
He added that reconfiguration also posed problems in determining delegates.
Solomon said that Linden and the secretariat had conflicting positions on the numbers and identification of delegates, since Linden was guided by their original groups and Congress Place insisted on using their reconfigured groups.
Solomon said too that the confusion of moving members around into different groups made it difficult to trace and allot delegates.
Solomon affirmed that the Party rules are clear on how groups should be formed but noted that those rules were not applied in the instance of Linden.
Solomon said that ensuring each member was issued a membership card was intended to avoid non-members or ineligible members casting a ballot.
He said that a party membership card informs when the person became a member.
According to Solomon, the secretariat’s decision to approve the use of national identification card or passport as a means of identification opened the electoral process for manipulation because these documents do not have the needed information to prove membership and eligibility as delegates.
He said that the non-issuance of cards affected a significant portion of Linden’s members and delegates.
Also, Solomon highlighted that he was nominated for the positions of Leader, Chairman, Vice Chairman (VC) and Committee Member. But the letter sent to him excluded the nomination for VC.
He claimed that the secretariat was advised of the oversight, with the accompanied evidence attached but this was never corrected as the nomination was not reflected on the ballot.

---

---