Guyanese have grown accustomed to the chicanery of the APNU

Dear Editor,

The APNU’s allegations to the effect that in the course of the submission of lists of candidates and nominators, acts of forgery, impersonation, intimidation, and threatening behavior were committed, are reminiscent of similar allegations made in the aftermath of the 2020 elections.

The APNU must know that such acts, once proven, are criminal offences and the right thing to do is to take those allegations to the appropriate law enforcement body along with the evidence they may have, should they be desirous of having their allegations addressed.

Note should however be taken of the advice offered in the Report of the COI into the 2020 elections which states inter alia;

‘The role of the police is to preserve law and order and detect crime. There should be some prohibition against police officers openly showing partisanship in elections and more importantly so, they should play no part in the election process on polling day save for such functions that are delegated to them by the commissioner of police.’

GECOM is not a criminal law enforcement body, it is not staffed with a crew of investigators to pry into alleged criminal behavior; and even if it were to do so, the fundamental question to be asked before any investigation is launched would be to what end?

The APNU’s call on GECOM to investigate its allegations is an attempt to push GECOM to act unlawfully, as though it is a court of law to adjudicate the spurious claims that the party has been bellyaching about. It is precisely for this reason that the chairman of GECOM has advised the APNU to either appeal to a magistrate or file an election petition after LGE 2023.

GECOM’s constitutional role is very clear and unambiguous; to give general direction and supervision of the conduct of General and Regional elections as well as Local Government elections. To call on that body to investigate the APNU’s allegations about “tons of names of persons who are not living” in certain areas… “but their signatures are there.” is to trample on the Criminal Investigation Department, the only legal body vested with the authority to act on such matters.

For Commissioner Alexander to now claim ‘he is seeking legal advise’ on the matter going forward, is not only duplicitous, but it is also disingenuous on his part since at the statutory meeting of GECOM held last Thursday he pretended to be an Attorney at Law when he proffered legal advice and interpreted the law to suit his party’s political agenda as regards the role and place of a Returning Officer in accepting lists of candidates from parties, community groups and independent candidates. In so doing, Commissioner Alexander openly challenged and rejected the learned Judge’s and GECOM Legal Officer’s legal opinion on the matter.

The APNU’s threats to stop the LGE if their allegations are not re - solved, resonates perfectly with the persistent shenanigans and filibustering tactics used from the outset by APNU Commissioners at GECOM’s statutory meetings under the pretext that they are doing so to ensure a ‘free, fair, credible local government election.’

This posture is unbelievable if not mind-boggling considering their attempts to steal the results of the 2020 General and Regional elections.

The APNU is upside down in its claim that given ‘the totality of powers that GECOM has it can investigate fraud in respect to forgeries, impersonation, and intimidation.’ This is a feeble attempt by that party to divert the public’s attention away from the infighting within its ranks whether it should or should not contest the LGE and to camouflage the fear of losing dramatically what they now desperately hang on to.

In the circumstances, it would come as no surprise were the APNU to continue playing the guessing game with its supporters and at the same time signaling the threat that; ‘all of it is on the table; none of it is off the table.”

While Guyanese have grown accustomed to the chicanery of the APNU, they are tired of their pretense of calling for free and fair elections and their unashamed attempts at pressuring GECOM to adopt bad decisions in law that can prove disastrous!

Yours faithfully,

Clement J. Rohee, GECOM Commissioner