Guyana: Freddie Kissoon’s Kaieteur News column of February 25 challenges Vincent Alexander, GECOM Commissioner, to respond to the following question: “do you think the result of the March election, was factual, fair, and legal?”
He publicly answered a question in July 2020 by way of a publication entitled: “General and Regional Elections 2020 – The Case for a Non-Declaration“; and other media. Nevertheless, for the benefit and possible improvement of Freddie and his ilk, here is the concluding paragraph of that publication, which is the summative answer to the issue which he previously addressed, on his own volition.
“Given the pillars on which my submission to the Commission was premised: ‘that no voter should be disenfranchised and only valid votes should be counted’ he can only reiterate my contention that the only resolution to the problem is for a non-declaration and a new process that reaffirms the enfranchisement of all and negates the impact of fraudulent votes.’
If Freddie and his ilk have a real interest in this answer, the publication was lodged at the National Library, and an electronic copy can be delivered upon request.
May he also take this opportunity, on the anniversary of March 2, to put on record two other views? Charandass’s vote on the No-Confidence Motion was one of the most objectionable and immoral acts in the history of Guyana’s politics. Unfortunately, it epitomizes the nature of politics in Guyana.
How could he have used a vote afforded him through devotion to a particular party to bring that party to its knees and erode the people’s electoral will? A conscience vote is the expression of a differing view.
It is not intended to be a Sword of Damocles drawn against the house in which you are a guest. Charandass was not directly elected and had no individual mandate. His act was much like the killing of Julius Caesar. Beware the “Ides of March.”
2. Many are vilified for the agonizing wait of six months as if it was not the mutual agreement of the PPP/C and the APNU-AFC that occasioned the delay. Suffice to say that, had the Commissioners attached to their task and had they been sufficiently competent and vigilant, and the wait would not have been necessary. The Commissioners rejected their central post where they were certifying and receiving a copy of every Statement of Poll.
They disbanded themselves of the tools that would have empowered them to challenge any attempt to declare a fraudulent result. Unlike the era of Doodnauth Singh, when work was announced without the Commission’s approval, 2001 and beyond required the Commission’s license. As of 2020, the Commissioners were in the physical custody of certified copies.
They were in a position to turn back any effort of fraud, as was done in 2011, although in 2011, the Commissioners were discarded copies of the Statements of Poll and prevented from recording the results. Alas, in 2020, the Commissioners abdicated their duty and joined the riotous band, and may now be marked the “Defenders of Democracy.” This article is written by Vincent Alexander, GECOM Commissioner.