I insist, GECOM treated my party unfairly

Jan 07, 2016 Letters

Dear Editor,
This is in reference to “Gecom says Guyana can look forward for fair LGE” (KN Jan 4) penned under the name of its deputy CEO Vishnu Persaud. GECOM says URP should be grateful that it went “out of its way” to help URP qualify to be on the ballot. So that means URP should not complain about a fraudulent election? If Gecom went out of its way to qualify URP and other minor parties, when they had not met the minimum requirements, then Gecom did not do its job and therefore the entire management should resign.
The United Republican Party repeats the following charges relating to Gecom: 1.The party requested from Gecom and was promised a list of polling places and names of polling officials prior to the May general election; it never received the list. 2. The party requested and was promised official accreditation of polling agents in critical stations where electoral malpractices were rampant; in spite of repeated efforts, URP polling agents were not accredited and were denied observer status as well as access to oversee the voting process to guarantee its integrity.
Gecom states the “URP provided no evidence to support its claim that there were fake statements of poll”. That comment alone undermines the entire response of Gecom to URP’s claims. It also undermines the credibility of the body to hold a free and fair election. The URP did not make a charge of fake statements of poll. It was the CEO of Gecom, Mr. Lowenfield, who revealed in a press conference and as reported in the press that he uncovered hundreds of fake statements. Lowenfield stated there were about 400 fake SOPs (PPP claims there were many more). This means at a minimum, some 25% of the SOPs were fraudulent. How could an election result be declared with such a high percentage of fake statements? How did Gecom arrive at its number and could that really reflect the will of voters?
Could fraud (fake SOPs) be the reason why URP received zero votes in places where voters swore they voted for the party? Is it credible that the URP candidates and the hundreds who signed the nominations and campaigned for the party did not vote for it? If Gecom feels the election was free and fair, then why was it opposed to a recount (after committing to one) and why was (is) it opposed to a forensic audit of the balloting? Why is it opposed to an expedited judicial hearing to the election petition? How is it possible that there were more voters that the actual number of registered voters? Is this not suggestive of fraud?
The record would reveal (as reported in the media) that Surujbally agreed to a recount of ballots and then suddenly changed his mind saying he would not order a recount. Why this change in mind? It is noted that in one region, APNU-AFC won by one vote. Why was there not a recount when there were so many spoilt ballots? Was there a move to steal that regional seat? Just asking! Given that here were fake statements of polls (and hundreds of them), should there not have been an automatic recount of the ballots in all the polling places to erase doubts about the fairness of the count? Surujablly promised an impartial investigation into the fake SOPs. A few months ago, he said he will not carry out an investigation.
Any impartial election officer worth his salt in any part of the globe would make it his responsibility to get to the bottom of how fake SOPs made their way into Gecom’s office or at polling places. It is reported in the media that presiding officers at some of the polling stations said they were given fake SOPs by officials of Gecom and APNU-AFC. Should that not have been investigated? Many voters reported that the ink used to stain their fingers easily washed off in some areas. Should that not have been investigated?
Vishnu Bandhu
Political Leader, URP

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News