GECOM CEO shifting goal posts on elections petition – PPP

Feb 10, 2019 News

---

By Abena Rockcliffe-Campbell

“If it had no merit then, how come it has merit now?”
That is the question People’s Progressive Party’s (PPP) Sase Gunraj wants to be answered by the Chief Elections Officer (CEO) of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), Keith Lowenfield.
Gunraj is one of the three Commissioners sitting on GECOM in representation of the PPP.

At a press conference on Friday, Gunraj noted comments made by Lowenfield at a briefing earlier the same day to the effect that GECOM has to ensure it address the concerns of PPP as filed in the 2015 elections petition.
Gunraj said that the CEO, in his opening “salvo,” spoke about the “grouses raised by stakeholders subsequent to the 2015 elections that were contained in an elections petition that has been languishing in the court for three and a half years.
“That very CEO, who by law was named the respondent in that matter, went to the court and made an application to the court to strike out that petition on the basis that it had no merit.”
Gunraj questioned how it is that Lowenfield said then, that the petition filed did not have merit “but coming to speak in 2019 about the grouses raised in that petition. It is not making sense.”
The Commissioner said that in any event, GECOM Secretariat had almost four years to remedy the issues raised.
Gunraj said, “If you did not take the initiative or the relevant steps to remedy those issues in that period, how now you are going to attempt to flagrantly violate the prescriptions of the Constitution in relations to the holding of election by relying on such issues?”
This is what the GECOM CEO said earlier the Friday, “Some of us may recall that for the 2015 election there is a petition that highlights some areas of concern by the petitioner as to things in their view that did not go so well.”
Lowenfield continued, “No doubt that matter is still before the court but the CEO has to be very wary of the concerns raised by stakeholders going forward and therefore in our preparations we have to—if indeed the issues are of concern—address them in a way that satisfies all stakeholders.
“It is going to be very foolhardy of any manager understanding the historical context to throw those concerns or those observations away.”
In June 2015, PPP filed its elections petition seeking fresh elections and a recount of all votes.

The petition was filed on behalf of the PPP/C by Ganga Persaud. Persaud was the appointed Election Agent of the List of Candidates for the PPP/C for the elections.
According to the petition, the validity of the recently-concluded elections was being called into question.
In the 19-page petition, the party made up to four demands of the High Court, including the recount of all ballot boxes for the elections. Fresh elections were also called for.
Unrest, fake statements of polls (SOPs) and multiple voting were among several causes cited when the PPP/C filed its elections petition.
Included in the petition were more than a dozen grounds on which the elections were being contested. These areas were highlighted as playing integral roles for the perceived illegality.
Among the causes listed were valid ballots being wrongfully deemed as rejected; arithmetic errors in many SOPs; multiple voting by persons at various polling divisions throughout Guyana; persons not on the Official List of Electors (OLE) being allowed to vote; the impersonation of voters and improperly sealed or unsealed ballot boxes.
Also included in the causes were claims of fake SOPs.
“Many of the Statements of Poll used by GECOM and/or the Chief Election Officer to ascertain the results, were not the Statements of Poll which emanated from the polling stations, but were fraudulently concocted and inserted into GECOM’s machinery, and therefore, the data contained thereon is not reflective of the will of the electorate as expressed at those polling stations,” the petition stated.
The petition further said that Persaud had been in contact on a number of occasions with different Commissioners of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM). According to Persaud, several issues had been raised during meetings between GECOM’s Commissioners and Chief Elections Officer (CEO), Keith Lowenfield.
Among these issues, Persaud said, were variances in SOPs between those in the possession of the CEO and Returning Officers and differences between GECOM’s official SOPs and others found.
The petition further stated that though repeated requests had been made of GECOM to provide additional information, including photocopies and/or electronic copies of SOPs from each polling station as submitted by Lowenfield, these requests went unanswered.

---

---