Alexander never concealed his designs at achieving certain immediate objectives at GECOM

Feb 10, 2023 Letters

---

Dear Editor,

Mr. Vincent Alexander, Opposition-sponsored GECOM Commissioner recently sought what appeared to be a cathartic relief because of his inability to impose his will at GECOM.

In S/N 8.2.’23 headlined; ‘Gecom chair rescinded appointment of Operations Coordinator’ the Commissioner came out swinging with an imaginary bat as if engaged in a surrealist game of his own. But his missive seemed to be more reflective of a therapy session to relieve abandonment, despair, solitude, and hope.

Mr. Alexander never concealed his designs at achieving certain immediate objectives at GECOM. His first objective was three-fold; to overthrow Mr. Aneal Giddings as Operations Coordinator at GECOM; secondly, to make the post of an Operations Coordinator redundant and thirdly, to press the chairman to formally rescind the appointment of Giddings. To further his quest, Mr. Alexander hurriedly went to the press on the matter.

While Commissioners Alexander, Corbin and Trotman held to the view that the creation of an Operations Coordinator and Giddings’ appointment were ‘ultra vires’, Government appointed Commissioners upheld the position that Mr. Giddings should remain in situ until a substantive Deputy Chief Election Officer (DCEO) is appointed by the Commission. Commissioners Gunraj, Narayan nor Rohee has resiled from that position.

When the Chair announced that, after listening to both sides on the matter, she decided to rescind Giddings’ temporary appointment until such time that a Deputy Chief Election Officer (DCEO) is appointed by the Commission. Mr. Alexander was elated, rubbing his hands in glee.

In effect, the decision by the Chair, dovetailed perfectly with what Alexander and company had ‘for weeks’ set out to achieve. But the dust is yet to settle on this matter. Next comes the second objective of the opposition-controlled Commissioners. That particular objective is transparent as transparent can be. The plan unfurling behind the scene is to have installed, their preferred candidate whose actions in the 2015 General and Regional elections are recorded as being inimical to the interests of the electorate. It would be woodenheaded to put in place a DCEO who has an axe to grind with supporters of the PPP/C.

In an attempt to put some sheen on their jaded reprobation and their sanctimonious posture, opposition commissioners led by Mr. Alexander claimed that I failed to keep a promise to submit a list of preferred candidates to fill the post of DCEO.

Suddenly, there is haste to install a DCEO of the APNU+AFC’s choice. Compared to the shilly-shallying, sloth and impervious stand adopted by A,C&T with respect to the adoption and execution of a Work Plan for the holding of local government elections, this charade makes a mockery of what otherwise should have been be a routine, peaceable activity void of the tantrum throwing episodes displayed by opposition commissioners at meetings of GECOM.

While pretending to be authoritative and imaginative in their presentations on the subject at the last Statutory meeting of GECOM, Mr. Alexander and company, unashamedly exerted every effort to ransack the twelfth (12) edition of the Work Plan submitted by the CEO for the holding of local government elections this year.

In treating with Work Plan No. 12, Mr. Alexander and company overlooked an important element that ought not to be underestimated when engaging in the business of the electorate. They failed to recognize that a sense of confidence and security must be felt all around when treating with the concerns of the electorate, any act discerned by the electorate as improper and unlawful could prove counterproductive. This is precisely what has occurred within recent times at GECOM where Mr. Alexander and company sought to impose questionable recommendations based on fabricated decisions at GECOM.

It is therefore clear to recognise that the opposition commissioners’ imaginary goals are shaped by their broader political attitude towards their political adversaries. Consequently, it would not be unreasonable to conclude that when certain opposition inspired shenanigans have outlived the purpose for which they were honed, they are either promptly abandoned, put in cold storage, consigned to memory and anecdote and eventually replaced by another piece of subterfuge.

Overall, then, it appears that Mr. Alexander and company seem more inclined to draw ‘political life lessons’ from narratives about an imaginary political world in which they apparently live rather than to draw lessons from facts about the real world.

As one who spent a long time at university campuses, Commissioner Alexander should know that dystopian narratives can encourage perspectives that oversimplify real and complex matters that emerge from time to time in and out of GECOM.

Yours faithfully,

Clement J. Rohee

---

• Clement J. Rohee, Commissioners Alexander, Commissioners Gunraj, Corbin, Narayan

---