GECOM replies to unfair criticism of its work

May 04, 2017 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
It is imperative that we respond to the letter carried in the Guyana Times of Saturday, April 22, 2017 under the title “Local Government and You” as authored by Mr. Neil Kumar. Mr. Kumar made reference to the published Notice pointing out that the period for the ongoing Claims and Objections (C&O) is April 24 to May 21, 2017 after the 9th Cycle of Continuous Registration would have concluded on March 18, 2017. This is patently inaccurate and misleading considering that the C&O exercise is a component of the 9th Cycle of Continuous Registration as is evident in the relevant Work Plan which was approved by the Commission.
Mr. Kumar went on to posit that “the period indicated above for the second phase of the exercise is approximately five weeks after claims and objections are scheduled to commence”. He went further to state that “the situation so far bares a plethora of obvious suspicious questions which are unanswered” – among which are (i) why the delay? and (ii) was the Elections Commission not prepared?
The start and end dates of the C&O exercise are compliant with those documented in the Work Plan for the conduct of the 9th Cycle of Continuous Registration. Anyone who is familiar with the conduct of a cycle of Continuous Registration would be aware that there was a regime of preparatory administrative and statutory activities which had to be completed, within a relatively tight timeframe, as prerequisites to the conduct of the C&O exercise. Accordingly, we hereby state unambiguously that there was no “delay” pertaining to the commencement of the C&O exercise, and the fact that we commenced the exercise in accordance with the Work Plan demonstrates that the Secretariat was obviously “prepared”, as mandated by the Commission.
With regards to Mr. Kumar’s position that “the relevance of the continuous registration being done at this time, in the absence of an upcoming election, was questionable, and the matter was raised without any adequate response from GECOM”, we have no knowledge where, when and with whom this matter was raised. In this letter Mr. Kumar questions the relevance of the conduct of the ongoing Claims and Objections exercise, by positing that “such exercises are normally to be followed by elections”. This position of Mr. Kumar makes it very obvious that his knowledge relative to the conduct of Claims and Objections as a component of a Cycle of Continuous Registration is relatively limited.
Mr. Kumar wrote that “currently, the political parties and the nation are yet to receive a report on the transactions that were completed, including registrations done, transfers done, and changes done at each GECOM office in the country”. He went on to say inter alia “We wait, but when would the report be available? GECOM appears to be doing everything within its authority to block information from reaching the public, thus implying that the body is not obligated by law to provide certain information, according to a release from Chief Elections Officer Lowenfield to the People’s Progressive Party”.
The Chief Election Officer gave copies of the categories and respective numbers of registration transactions which were conducted during the registration phase of the 9th Cycle of Continuous Registration exercise, and an electronic copy of the current Preliminary List of Electors (PLE). This was done at the above mentioned Meeting. Further, at that meeting, the PPP delegation requested a hard copy of the PLE and summaries of the new registrations and transfers, by Registration Division, that were done during the exercise. This was provided to the Party on Friday, April 21, 2017.
Identical data was provided to the APNU+AFC, via the coalition’s Representative who was also present at the above mentioned Meeting.
Mr. Kumar wrote that “there are reports of exorbitant spending by the elections body for the registration period. Many vehicles were rented and hired beforehand, yet many special taxis still had to be utilized. It was also reported that water and air transportation costs were deliberately inflated and exceeded the planned budget, and meals and meals allowances were costly”.
In this regard, we hereby state unequivocally that:-
(i) no vehicle was hired beforehand; and if any, the hire of “special” taxis would have been minimal and only in Registration Areas where no GECOM owned vehicle is posted,
(ii) water transportation for hinterland riverain areas were hired following the advertisement for the provision of such services to be tendered for,
(iii) we are satisfied that the costs associated with the provision of meals for GECOM staff and Party Scrutineers were within acceptable limits and within the relevant budgetary provisions,
(iv) we will leave it up the Companies that provided air services to comment on whether they engaged in collusion with the GECOM Secretariat relative to the claim that the relevant charges were inflated,
(v) any audit of the relevant vouchers and supporting documents would substantiate our position.
Mr. Kumar also wrote that “also noticeable during the registration exercise was the treatment of the public by some of the so-called trained GECOM staff. Some officers were guilty of being rude and disrespectful to persons wanting to do transactions; young registrants were bullied, and some were even asked to leave buildings for being inappropriately dressed, whereas others were allowed in despite wearing similar attire. The young registrants that are perceived to be PPP, especially girls, faced the brunt of some GECOM officers’ actions. It was quite disgusting that in numerous cases, persons left GECOM centres, never to return, because of the officers’ attitude”. He added that “some of the PPP scrutineers faced the same treatment, and many accepted what was meted out to them as they wanted to remain in the centres to prevent the officers from committing any intended skullduggery”
At Senior Management level, we never fail to remind all frontline staff, who interact with members of the public in general, of the need for them to maintain courtesy, professionalism and efficiency. In fact this need was reinforced at the last Meeting of Managers of the Secretariat and Registration Officers on April 7, 2017, and again at refresher training sessions across Guyana on April 19 and 21, 2017. This action was taken, not in response to complaints against our staff, but because this is in line with our strategy for the maintenance of a good public image between and among the Commission’s publics. Having said that, we invite all stakeholders to bring to our attention any official malpractice that might have been committed by any of our staff to enable us to deal with any such occurrence accordingly. However, such stakeholders must be prepared to substantiate the report(s) as we cannot and will not entertain heresay.
Vishnu Persaud
Deputy Chief Election Officer

---

---