The so-called “Clean List” possesses both truth and trap

Sep 07, 2022 Letters

---

Dear Editor,

We are going about this registration business in the wrong way.  We are trying to achieve objectives in one of two ways.  First, we go around in circles.  Second, there is self-congratulation over participating in shortcuts or cutting corners.  Whatever the objectives for the PPP and PNC, they condemn us to the usual pre- and post- elections disclaimers and denunciations.

 

The so-called “Clean List” possesses both truth and trap.  In truth, there has never been an election where the entire apparatus has not been harshly condemned, sanitizing and all.  From GECOM to run up to actual voting to counting and reporting of the counting to tabulating and reporting, every piece of the process, and at each painful, tortured step, there is dispute and disagreement with many devils unleashed.  Our elections trap us in a national horror show that even abuses and insults those observing and helping the process, with questions about integrity.

 

For the above reasons, I regret that what we are doing, or agreeing to; today, they are nothing but half-measures sure to result in the half-cooked lead to the half-sick, if not half-dead.  Some real-life examples should help.  We are trying to fix an old, broken-down vehicle (or machine) by painting it over, patching through servicing, checking tire pressure, filling it up with gas, and expecting it to perform better over the long haul.  It is insane to believe that cosmetics are going to deliver a satisfying election (season).  It is giving a life support patient some vitamins and expecting a miracle.

Let’s face it: our elections system from top to bottom is in a bad state, and unless we are prepared to get down in the bushes and swamps; we are fooling ourselves. Frankly, I am not so sure that even a complete overhaul would satisfy Guyanese, given the life and death struggles surrounding elections.  We must make fresh start by scrapping what we have, throwing away all the old (baby, bathwater and spare diapers), and beginning from scratch.  There is no other way if this society is going to have a clean elections slate, arrive at some acceptable elections process and result.

Unsurprisingly, the latest word is of this “Clean List.”  What really is that phantom, that jumbie of the imagination?  Whose definition of what is represented by a Clean List meets the bill.And who would be so unwise as to fall for that latest electoral sleight of hand?  Since we don’t have clean people running most things around here, somebody help me, please, and enlighten on how we will have something CLEAN for what is the arguably the dirtiest part of this nation’s apparel.  Trouble looms.

 

I offer a quick aside: recently, two persons came to my residence with clipboard in hand asking for my name.  The word was that they were part of this sanitizing (my words) Clean List exercise.  Thinking they were from GECOM, I was appalled to learn that they were from one of the two major political parties.  While I understand that this is what we have currently, I find the thought of personal details in the files of any political party most alarming, as well as repugnant.  To ensure that everyone gets the message about where I am, this applies to any and all political parties.  I move along.

Regarding the calls for reform, I think this is tremendous, but we reforming what was supposedly already reformed. For ‘reform’ to be real, it must be comprehensive and genuine, which means starting over.  We could get something robust, reliable, and hopefully nearer to rig-proof.  But I have a problem, sure to cause distress.  Governments control the elections machinery locally; they have the greatest say as to what ends up being the final reform components.  This gives any government a distinctive edge in influencing finalized reform visions, engagements, and actual implementation. Governments hold all trumps, and they don’t surrender any.  The PPP Government is not squeamish or a wallflower where any element menacing its existence in office appears.  No matter how minute, how improbable, threatening reform developments would be killed.  That is bankable.

To conclude, we can comfort ourselves with Carter Center visits, structure, and face of GECOM, and the distance that traveled from the 1970s and 80s.  We have used different pathways, but we are still arriving at the same destinations.  Who tried to cheat?  Who won but should have lost?  Who is disenfranchised and who empowered wrongly?  Clearly, something is out of whack, and the only true remedy is to begin all over from the very beginning.

Sincerely,

GHK Lall

---

---