Weekend Mirror 6-7 April 2019

6-7 April, 2019 / Vol. 10 No. 67 / Price: $100

Internet: http: //www.mirrornewsgy.com / e-mail: weekendmirror@gmail.com

Lowenfield told to halt move to house-to-house registration or face legal charges PAGE 9

Conflict of interest at CH&PA involving SEE INSIDE PPP/C MPs Minister’s husband exposed PAGE 11

Rose Hall Estate workers attached to Albion Estate on strike PAGE 15

with dual citizenship submit resignation letters PAGE 7

‒ Two of three will renounce foreign citizenship

Framers of the Constitution could not have PAGE 2 contemplated a calculation of ‘32 and a half’ person – former TT Prime Minister

PPP/C will be ‘vigilant’ of any attempt to register PAGE 8 people who should not be on Voters’ List - Jagdeo

2

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

‘One cannot read into the Constitution what is not there’ – former Chancellor

T

he March 22, 2019 decision of the Appeal Court continues to make waves in Guyana. And former Chancellor of the Judiciary, Justice Cecil Kennard, is one of several persons who have weighed in on the decision.

According to him, the Constitution of Guyana is clear on what number of votes was required for the passage of the no-confidence motion.

The Appeal Court overturned the ruling of the Chief Justice (ag), Roxanne George-Wiltshire, relative to one of the primary arguments raised in the challenge to the validity of the vote on the no-confidence motion on December 21, 2018 – a vote that was upheld by Guyana’s Legislature. In a 2-1 vote, Justices Yonnette Cummings-Edwards and Dawn Gregory ruled that the 33 votes is not a majority of 65; rather it is 34. Justice Rishi Persaud voted to uphold the ruling of the Chief Justice (ag), which was handed down on January 31, 2019.

Article 106 (6) of the Constitution states that: “The Cabinet including the President shall resign if the Government is defeated by the vote of a majority of all the elected members of the National Assembly on a vote of confidence.”

Kennard contends that

nowhere in the Constitution of Guyana were the terms “absolute” or “simple” majority mentioned.

“The Constitution is clear; it doesn’t say absolute majority. It speaks about majority of all the members of the National Assembly and so, one have to interpret that and insert it in every context…one has to look at the spirit of Constitution and the Constitution says a majority of all Elected Members,” he said.

Notably, the Chief Justice (ag), Roxanne George-Wiltshire, whose ruling the Appeal Court overturned, had said: “While

“The Constitution is clear; it doesn’t say absolute majority. It speaks about majority of all the members of the National Assembly and so, one have to interpret that and insert it in every context…one has to look at the spirit of Constitution and the Constitution says a majority of all Elected Members.” – Former Chancellor of the Judiciary, Cecil Kennard the terms ‘simple majority’ and ‘absolute majority’ may be useful in common parlance for the purposes of interpretation – and some Constitutions do have such language – it might be best to focus on the meanings of those terms instead of the terms themselves. That is, instead of asking what con-

stitutes an ‘absolute majority’, this Court will consider what constitutes a ‘majority of all elected Members of the National Assembly’. “…in the case of a requirement for a majority of all elected members of the National Assembly at least thirty-three (33) votes must always be obtained to meet that requirement.

“…it must be noted here that in the no confidence motion moved in our National Assembly the Speaker found that the motion had been carried by a majority of thirty-three – thirty-two (33-32).

“It must also be noted that, as the Applicant [Attorney General, Basil Williams] admitted in his oral submissions, no one in the National Assembly at the time, neither the elected members nor anyone else, indicated to the Speaker that the vote could not be carried by a majority of thirty-three – thirty-two (33-32). “…in our 65-member National Assembly, therefore, a majority of all elected members of the National Assembly, in accordance with the principle of “one over all rivals combined”, is thirty-three (33) members.

This is so since the maximum number of potential opposers can only be thirty-two (32).”

According to Kennard, the Chief Justice (ag) was correct in her ruling. He said, “There is no question about that. Her decision was a very firm one.”

He added, “One cannot read into the Constitution what is not there. One cannot review the question, when the question (never) arose of whether it’s ‘absolute’ or what not…when one looks at the Constitution and what it says, does the Constitution use the world absolute, definitely not…I don’t know what the Constitution of other countries says, but our Constitution is clear on this.

Nowhere in the Constitution, is the word ‘absolute’ mentioned.”

The People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) has since moved to the Caribbean Court of Justice to have the decision of the Appeal Court overturned. A hearing in the matter is set for May 9 and 10, 2019.

“One cannot read into the Constitution what is not there. One cannot review the question, when the question (never) arose of whether it’s ‘absolute’ or what not…when one looks at the Constitution and what it says, does the Constitution use the world absolute, definitely not…I don’t know what the Constitution of other countries says, but our Constitution is clear on this. Nowhere in the Constitution, is the word ‘absolute’ mentioned.” – Former Chancellor of the Judiciary, Cecil Kennard

Framers of the Constitution could not have contemplated a calculation of ‘32 and a half’ person – former TT Prime Minister V eteran politician and former Trinidad and Tobago Prime Minister, Basdeo Panday, contends that Guyana’s Appeal Court had an obligation to interpret what the Constitution says.

Panday’s comments came speaking during a broadcast of a Globespan Town Hall panel discussion on Saturday (March 30, 2019), where the March 22, 2019 decision of the Appeal Court was up for discussion. The Court of Appeal set aside the ruling of the Chief Justice (ag), Roxanne George-Wiltshire, relative to one of the three cases that challenged the validity of the

vote on the no-confidence motion on December 21, 2018.

In a 2-1 vote, Justices Yonnette Cummings-Edwards and Dawn Gregory ruled that the 33 votes is not a majority of 65; rather it is 34. Justice Rishi Persaud voted to uphold the ruling of the Chief Justice (ag), which was handed down on January 31, 2019.

According to him, if the framers of Guyana’s Constitution wanted to specify an “absolute” majority, then the Constitution would have said so.

The Constitutional provision the former Trinidad and Tobago Prime Minister

referred to is Article 106 (6), which states that: “The Cabinet including the President shall resign if the Government is defeated by the vote of a majority of all the elected members of the National Assembly on a vote of confidence.”

Panday said, “It seems to me as though a distinction is trying to be made with a provision in Guyana’s Constitution, that all members of Guyana’s Parliament should be present. And they are hanging on to this little thing… but if the Parliament wanted an absolute as opposed to a simple, it would say so. All

“Sixty-five divided by two is 32 and a half. I don’t think they (framers of Constitution) intended that you should have 32 and a half man. It’s simple. You can’t have a half man. So a majority of 65 is 33. That’s how I would interpret it.”

– Former TT Prime Minister, Basdeo Panday

it (Constitution) said was, all must be present. But it doesn’t change the balance. It doesn’t say, well it shouldn’t be a simple majority. If they wanted that they would say that. “…sixty-five divided by two is 32 and a half. I don’t think they (framers of Constitution) intended that you should have 32 and a half man. It’s simple. You can’t have a half man. So a major-

ity of 65 is 33. That’s how I would interpret it.”

CONSTITUTIONAL IS CLEAR Notably, Panday and several others have expressed sentiment similar to those voiced by Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo.

On Friday (March 22, 2019) evening in a televised video recording, Jagdeo

stressed that the Constitution is clear in saying that the vote is valid if a majority of all elected Parliamentarians – 33 Parliamentarians – cast their vote in favour of the passage of a no-confidence motion. He added that all right-thinking Guyanese would concluded that 33 is the majority of 65 – a conclusion that was extensively addressed by the Chief Justice (ag) in her ruling. “No strange mathematics can change what is in the Constitution…a majority of all elected members in the National Assembly is 33,” Jagdeo said.

The Opposition Leader pointed out that in 2014 when the Alliance For Change (AFC), supported by A Partnership for National Unity (APNU), advanced a no-confidence motion against former President Donald Ramotar, it was done with the explicit (Turn to page 9)

3

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

‘Cesspool of corruption at Dep’t of Citizenship’ – Jagdeo A review of the advertisements – intended to facilitate the award of Guyanese citizenship – that were published only in the stateowned Guyana Chronicle in the last few weeks, turned up what can only be described as fraudulent actions by the Department of Citizenship, within the Ministry of the Presidency, according to Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo.

Crediting the research into the matter to People’s Progressive Party (PPP) Executive Member, Gail Teixeira, and others, Jagdeo said, “We believe that a lot of people are being smuggled through Guyana and that within the department of Citizenship, in the Ministry of the Presidency, there is an enormous cesspool of corruption.”

According to him, the reason for this corruption could very well be two-fold: one, persons are being made to pay to secure Guyanese citizenship; and/ or, two, the fraud is being perpetrated with the hope of having fake names inserted in Guyana’s National Register of Registrants, which is used to develop the Official List of Electors used for Elections.

“Maybe hundreds or thousands paying for citizenship and they are brought in here for other reasons…also, what we are seeing could be that people are given fake docu-

this issue.”

Notably, only last week, when asked to comment on an issue involving Minister Felix, the Opposition Leader

ments to influence any potential registration process,” he said.

Detailing the findings of the research – findings that he charged represented the “tip of the iceberg” – the Opposition Leader referred to three worrying cases.

On February 5, 2019, an advertisement in the Guyana Chronicle, indicated that a person named Gabriel St. Juste of Burma Mahaicony, Lot 65 East Coast Demerara applied to Minister of Citizenship, Winston Felix, for Guyanese citizenship.

However, on February 7, 2019, another advertisement was published by the Guyana Chronicle with the same photograph, but a different name and address - Daniel Garcia Farres of 10-10 Norton Street, Cemetery Road, Georgetown, also applying for citizenship.

The second case related to an advertisement published by the Guyana Chronicle on March 27, 2019, where a person named Rubesh Abdus of

made it clear that Felix is untrustworthy.

Given the latest revelations, Jagdeo assured that this issue is one that raised

grave concerns and assured that the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic will continue to follow the issue. (See related reporting on page 19)

Tabatinga, Lethem Region 9, applied for citizenship. However, on March 29, 2019, another advertisement with the same photograph had a different name and address – this time, Hajime Beltran Abreu of Lot 39 Owen Street, Kitty, Georgetown.

In the third case, an advertisement published by the Guyana Chronicle on March 29, 2019, indicated that Julio Antonio Beltran of Lot 39 Owen Street, Kitty, Georgetown, applied to the Minister of Citizenship for Guyanese citizenship. This was the same address on another advertisement published by the Guyana Chronicle on the same day. Checks showed that the persons listed at the address - Lot 39 Owen Street, Kitty, Georgetown – do not live there.

Jagdeo said, “This cannot be a mistake, this is a pattern and it is happening right before our eyes at Chronicle and they believe that people are not seeing it because most of us do not pay attention to

In light of new concerns…

Silence from gov’t continues on concerns about trafficking of Haitians, Cubans

T

he position of the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) is that it will continue to pursue the issue, stemming from details exposed in statistics on foreign nationals entering and leaving Guyana from 2015 to April 30, 2018. There has still been no move by Government to address the alarming issue exposed by the statistics.

After the issue first came up, Minister Felix, on May 23, 2018, wrote to the Clerk of the National Assembly and provided statistics of several main groups of foreign nationals, with the largest arrival and departure figures, for the past five years and the first quarter of 2018.

A breakdown of the information showed alarming information for two groups – Cubans and Haitians.

According to the numbers, from 2015 to April 30, 2018, a total of 93,374 Cubans arrived in Guyana, but

only 76,663 were recorded to have left. This means that there are 16,711 Cubans still in Guyana. However, there is no evidence that such a large number of Cubans are still in Guyana.

For Haitians, the numbers show that, from 2015 to April 30, 2018, a total of 6,245 arrived in Guyana, but only 963 were recorded to have left. This means that there are 5,282 Haitians still in Guyana. As is the case with the Cubans, there is no evidence that there are over 5,000 Haitians living in Guyana.

In early June 2018, both Felix and Foreign Affairs Minister, Carl Greenidge, were summoned to the Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs to answer questions on the alarming statistics. Less than satisfactory, according to the PPP/C members on that Committee, were recorded during that meeting.

Also, in June 2018,

the APNU+AFC Coalition Government’s silence on human trafficking concerns has been purposely evidenced in the state-owned Guyana Chronicle, which failed to even mention the concerns that were raised in his report on the Parliamentary Committee on Foreign

Affairs meeting. The stateowned newspaper, instead, focused on the number of Guyanese and Venezuelans with Guyanese parentage who have returned to Guyana. However, according to the statistics provided by Felix, from 2015 to April 30, 2018, a total of 7,732

persons arrived in Guyana from Venezuela and 7,430 were recorded to have left – leaving only 302 in Guyana.

Notably, while the Coalition Government has remained silent on this issues, several top government officials are said to be involved in the trafficking

of Haitians and Cubans – using Guyana as a transshipment point. Reports are that the persons who are trafficked through Guyana have to pay as much as US$6,000 for Guyanese documents, which are used as they are moved out of the country.

4

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

Guest

EDITORIAL Worrying signals amid push for new House-to-House registration

O

bjections, substantiated by facts, to the Coalition Government’s insistence on doing a new national house-tohouse registration continue to be ignored.

And in the rush to have the house-to-house registration done – training having already started – several worrying signals have been sent.

Before dealing with what these worrying signals, it is apposite to note that the justifications offered by the Coalition Government and the government-nominated the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Commissioners are: 1. The list is bloated with names of persons who are deceased – this is an administrative issue, since GECOM itself can remove the names of dead people from the list.

2. Young people will be disenfranchised and will not be able to vote – this is not true because all Guyanese, so long as they are 14-years-old would have been captured in the continuous registration cycles done by GECOM (the last one having been in July 2018 and finalized by October 2018) and their names would be included on the National Register of Registrants, which is used to develop the Official List of Electors. Once youths attain the age of 18-years, their names would be automatically extracted from the National Register of Registrants and placed on the Official List of Electors.

Additionally, the facts that substantiate the objections to the move to new national house-to-house registration include: one, on February 5, 2019, Chief Elections Officer (CEO), Keith Lowenfield, declared that the Voters’ List is clean – in clear contradiction to what the APNU+AFC Coalition Government has said; two, the Coalition Government contested the November 12, 2018 Local Government Elections (LGE) with the same list and there were no complaints whatsoever; and three, comparative data compiled by the Sweden-based International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) confirm that Guyana’s Registration List cannot be categorized as bloated.

Relative to the worrying signals in the rush to have new national house-to-house registration done, first, GECOM acting in concert with the APNU+AFC Coalition Government, is proposing the de-registration of Guyanese who are not in Guyana when the house-to-house registration commences.

Many in the political arena and in civil society have already flagged this as unconstitutional. If Guyanese have to be in Guyana when the house-to-house registration commences, what happens to Guyanese students studying abroad? What happens to Guyanese working abroad?

Minister of State, Joseph Harmon, has said, “If you reside overseas and you are not there at the time when the enumerators go to your house, then you cannot be considered to be on the list of electors.” Then he adds that, “It’s not a matter of disenfranchising anyone.” How can this been seen as anything but disenfranchising Guyanese of their right to vote?

Also, what of the fact that de-registration is unconstitutional? Article 59 of the Constitution states clearly that: “…every person may vote at an election if he or she is of age eighteen years or upwards and is either a citizen of Guyana or a Commonwealth citizen domiciled and resident in Guyana.”

Secondly, is the issue of award of Guyanese citizenship to persons applying for naturalization. Already, in the space of a just a few weeks, advertisements published in the state-owned Guyana Chronicle expose fraudulent actions by the Department of Citizenship, within the Ministry of the Presidency. In some cases, the photograph of one person is published under at least two different names and addresses.

In others, the same address is used for multiple persons – despite the fact that checks at those addresses revealed that the persons named in the advertisements do not even live there and persons in the area have never heard of them. Is this an attempt to award Guyanese citizenship under different names to one person to allow them to double register when the house-to-house registration commences, and, therefore, vote twice when General and Regional Elections are called?

Third, is the indication that house-to-house registration would be used as the excuse to delay General and Regional Elections once they become due. The challenge to the validity of the no-confidence motion is currently before the Carib-

National Assembly must not be used as a conduit for campaign financing for APNU+AFC gov’t Dear Editor,

I

n a previous letter, I outlined that there should be no sitting of the National Assembly, until a full and final determination of all matters relating to the No-Confidence Motion, currently before the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). Based upon the Case Management Conference (CMC) held on the 29th day of March 2019, we can expect a ruling shortly after the 10th day of May 2019.

The Government’s announcement of an April 11, 2019 sitting of the National Assembly must be rejected by all fair minded, right thinking and objective Guyanese, which in essence should be all Guyanese. Accompanying that announcement was the declared intention to seek a supplementary budget for the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) and as we now understand, there has been instructions to several agencies in various Ministries, to prepare requests for supplementary budgets, which will be tabled at Cabinet

for approval.

Without any difficult, the conclusion can be made that the above actions of this Granger-led APNU+AFC Government, is to use this period for an assault on the Treasury, to drawn down on additional funds to support their current disguised, but openly seen political campaign. Accounting Officers and Heads of Budget Agencies must be aware, and I also use this medium to offer some advice to them, that should there be an upholding of the validity of the No-Confidence Motion by the CCJ, all actions of this Government of this nature post 21st December 2018, and more so, post 21st March 2019, would be illegal and voidable. Just to remind that the only reason why this Government remained in Office after the successful passage of the No-Confidence Motion was for the sole purpose of conducting an election, which were mandated by the Constitution within three (3) months. This was in accordance to Article 106, specifically, Article 106 (7) of the Constitution.

One must wonder how is it that

after this Government’s inability to implement significant percentages of Budgets 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018, that three (3) months into 2019, there is a need for supplementary budgets.

What is being done in 2019, which was not envisaged and planned for in budget 2019, when it was debated and passed in December 2018.

Editor, the answer is a simple one.

The Coalition Government is using the Consolidated Fund and taxpayers’ monies for campaigning, electioneering and vote buying.

No amount of mamaguying and hoodwinking will work. The people do not have confidence in this insensitive, aloft and uncaring Administration. The National Assembly must not be used as a conduit for campaign financing for the Government.

There should be no sitting of the National Assembly, await the ruling of the CCJ first.

Yours truly Bishop Juan A. Edghill M.P.

APNU+AFC gov’t cannot ignore the call of the private sector and other stakeholders for a politically stable and democratic environment Dear Editor,

T

he private sector, through its representative bodies, has been playing an increasing role in the body politic of Guyana.

This, in my view, is a welcome development. Gone are the days when the state owned and controlled what was regarded as the commanding heights of the economy. Today the private sector is seen as the engine of growth and, taken as a whole, is the largest employer of labour.

The role of the state is primarily that of creating an enabling environment for the private sector to create wealth by providing the necessary infrastructure and at the same time ensuring that the rights of workers are protected as enshrined in the law.

The country can only prosper when wealth is created. This is why it is important that the environment for wealth creation is enhanced by way of sound economic policies and fiscal incentives.

This is all the more necessary as we enter into a new era in our economic life, in which the main driver of economic growth will be oil and gas, as opposed to a narrow range of exports such as sugar, rice and gold.

The private sector must be commended for taking a stand on the issue of good governance and respect for the rule of law. In fact, there is a positive correlation between private sector development and democratic governance. Business and investment, both foreign and local, do not respond well to political instability. The country paid a heavy price during the days of

bean Court of Justice (CCJ). The Parliamentary Opposition has indicated that if the CCJ does not rule in Government’s favour – if it rules that the passage of the no-confidence motion was valid – then Government is likely to use houseto-house registration as their excuse to say that General and

undemocratic rule and we have a duty as a society to ensure that we do not revert to such a debilitating past.

The days of state as the largest source of employment are long gone.

The public sector is not in a position to absorb the growing number of out of school youths, many of whom are now forced to join the ranks of the unemployed.

The government cannot ignore the call of the private sector and other stakeholders for a politically stable and democratic environment. Our young people need jobs and it is the responsibility of the government to facilitate job creation efforts initiated by the private sector.

Regards, Hydar Ally

Regional Elections cannot be held.

With facts being what they are, how can Guyanese trust the process to embark on new national house-to-house registration? Any such move must enjoy the confidence of the Guyanese people.

5

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

Those who claim that the PPP was/is ‘not a model of electoral purity’ must provide incontrovertible evidence

PPP has demonstrated genuine leadership and I harnessed strong and positive support from civil society

Dear Editor,

Dear Editor,

O

verwhelming precedence in the Guyana Legislature (Parliament), provides evidence of the understanding, acceptance and practice regarding how the term “majority” has been applied and used for decades. Legitimate expectations of likewise application are, therefore, expected by all Guyanese and concerned stakeholders in the case of the No-Confidence Motion (NCM), which has been brought to the forefront of judicial considerations, review and rulings.

The term “majority” is used 15 times in Guyana’s Constitution – Chapter 1:01, without any qualifying measures being described by the term “absolute”. It is, therefore, a consensual acceptance of our columnists, and by most Guyanese citizens, that where such meaning is implicitly conferred in the Constitution, it is represented by the actual percentage of persons who have to be voting as a part of the specific requirement or decision.

In such instances, the contents of the proviso to Section 164 (2) (b), includes an apt example where it states: “(a) and is supported at the final voting in the Assembly by the votes of not less than two-thirds of all the elected members of the Assembly it shall not be necessary to submit the Bill to the vote of the electors”. It is the accepted understanding that the provided numbers where stated in the Constitution define the applicable consideration.

The use of the “absolute” qualifying criteria in the NCM matter by two of the learned Appeal Court judges, appears to have been implicitly applied in arriving at their recent Appeal Court decisions, which seems to run counter to foregoing approach.

Although the Opposition will have to accept the surprising ruling and seek redress at the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), justice does not appear to have been done.

There is no doubt that the rulings are irrational to the general public, and further confounds previous decisions made on 33 greater than 32 principles, including the decision to establish a Government. The situation creates a further conundrum regarding what situation the Speaker of the Legislature would be required to implicitly apply, where there are no specific qualifying numbers for votes.

It is indeed sad and difficult for Guyanese to accept the recent decision and the implied disrespect of the Appeal Court to the ruling made by Chief Justice (Ag) Roxanne George. The fact that the Appellate Judge Rishi Persaud dissented and endorsed the Chief Justice’s “ruling”, adds to the distressing situation and justifies the decision of the Opposition to move to the CCJ. However, the interpretation of two other Judges Yonette Cummings-Edwards and Dawn Gregory was reflected in their decision to vote against the passing of the NCM, which was passed in the National Assembly with a clear majority when 33 members voted for the motion and 32 voted against. The

Speaker ruled that the motion was passed and on the night of December 21, 2018, the then Prime Minister and the then President accepted that the A Partnership for National Unity/Alliance For Change (APNU/AFC) Government has fallen.

From an examination of the basis on which the number of parliamentary representatives is decided by the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), it is established that each parliamentarian represents a specific number of citizens. In context, when a vote is taken on behalf of a representative number of citizens by parliamentary representatives, 33 will always be greater than 32 when is reflected accumulatively. This argument substantively mitigates against the issue of 34 votes is a majority, and the two ‘supposed to be’ imminent judges ruling based on other extraneous consideration is a serious matter that will further divide our nation.

The CCJ is now tasked with the responsibility to make the decision which takes into consideration all relevant factors, with non-partisan consideration and reflective of applied precedence within the meaning of the law for Guyana’s jurisprudence. The context must ensure that justice is done within the meaning of the law, but with the respect of all the Guyanese people. Applicable to the foregoing purports to ensure that we get free and fair elections earliest.

The CCJ is asked to uphold the NCM vote contrary to the two unpopular Appeal Court decision for in the eyes of the public, it cannot be denied that the NCM vote is valid and it is highly anticipated that the CCJ will do what is right.

It must be noted that the existing Voters’ List is valid until April 30, 2019, and the list must be used to hold the constitutionally required General and Regional Elections.

Since the mandate of GECOM presumes its purpose and readiness to conduct elections at short notice, the public announcement that the organisation will be proceeding with house-to-house registration is presumptions and contemptuous. It must be clear that the court, as the guardian of the Constitution, must grant effective orders which must ensure compliance with the Constitution.

The massive countrywide protest that took place in Guyana on March 22, 2019, is a clear indication that things are not going to be usual. It is of note that the Government now wants things to go back to normalcy, when they did everything abnormal following the rulings of the Speaker and the Chief Justice. It should not be allowed as we await the decisions of the CCJ. The People’s Progressive Party has demonstrated genuine leadership and harnessed strong and positive support of several civil and fair-minded organisations who are fully preparing to struggle for immediate free and fair elections. Guyanese must unite and stop the current APNU/AFC extant bullyish behaviour.

Sincerely, Neil Kumar

t is always more fun than a challenge to respond to published letters penned by Eusi Kwayana. Some have questioned the timing and purpose of Kwayana’s letter published in the Stabroek News of March 26, 2019.

I have known Eusi personally during political struggles associated with the Movement Against Oppression, Dr Walter Rodney, the trials of Arnold Rampersaud, the Mahaicony Three, the struggles of the bauxite workers in alliance with sugar workers, the Committee in Defence of Democracy and the Patriotic Coalition for Democracy. I concede that those are obviously not enough to really know Eusi Kwayana.

As far as his membership and association with the PPP is concerned, there is enough in the party’s and Red House’s archives that speak to what manner of man Sydney King, now Eusi Kwayana, was in the ‘Old PPP.’ I consider it necessary to establish these facts before proceeding to respond to his letter.

Kwayana’s political activism would, probably, stretch way back to the 1940s.

April 4th will mark his 94th birthday.

It is not unusual for Kwayana’s writings to be situated in a historical context, particularly, as regards the ‘Old PPP’, which he had a strong relationship with in its early beginnings.

Since the PPP is made up of neither eunuchs nor saints, it would be obtuse for anyone to claim that the PPP is a model of purity, electorally or otherwise. In fact, any political party that sets itself atop a pedestal, pretending to be a paragon of virtue, should be called out and made to answer for its pretentiousness and demagoguery.

Long before the transformation of the PPP from a loose mass party to a more disciplined type of party, the PPP had, at numerous party congresses, regional and district conferences and at party group meetings, conceded its deficiencies at the organisational and ideological levels. Corrections and adjustments have been made along the way.

The Constitution of the ‘modern PPP’ states inter-alia: “The Central Committee shall take the initiative for the development of fullest criticism and self-criticism. All criticism must take place in the appropriate party bodies and meetings.”

Mr Kwayana is historically correct in his characterisation of the 1953 electoral era and the legal age for voting at that time.

However, as regards Dr Jagan’s urgings to crowds at that time, as per registration, telling them, “if you can marry at 18 and fight at 18, you can vote at 18,” I prefer to contextualise and make more precise what Kwayana chose to put in more popular language.

Ever since the PPP was formed in 1950, it has been advocating the vote for 18 years and over.

The party’s first demand for the vote at 18 was in late 1950, when a team of party representatives appeared before a Com-mission to prepare for the introduction of the Ministerial system of government.

Mr Forbes Burnham, the then Chairman of the PPP, was a member of the delegation.

He supported the argument before the Commission for the vote at 18.

The 21 versus 18 voting age became a flashpoint during talks for an independent Guyana.

During those talks, Jagan called for a ‘fully self-governing territory’ while Burnham countered with his call for ‘full internal

self-government.’

Under pressure from his constituents and recognising Jagan had a much more advanced nationalistic position reflected in his call for independence, Burnham changed his position and called for independence under the proportional representation system.

Burnham came under criticism from Sydney King, now Eusi Kwayana, his party’s General Secretary when he declar-ed that: “…the Burnham statement is dangerous to the African people. I cannot be part of Burnham’s plan. His plan is to help Jagan win independence. A seat is reserved for him on Jagan’s plane.”

King was subsequently expelled from the party.

Later, by a strange twist of events, Burnham and King joined up under the common slogan ‘No Independence Under Jagan.’

Both men were now tethered to an anti-PPP bandwagon in support of voting at 21. A position favored by the colonial authorities.

The rationale behind the party’s demand for voting at 18 was based on the law that existed at the time in the colony. Accordingly, a person was entitled at the age of 18, to be employed in the public service of the colony. That person could become a member of the police or military forces. Moreover, a male person at that age could have assumed responsibility for a wife and raise a family.

Thus, it was felt that if a person is capable of assuming all these responsibilities, then surely, he/she would be mature enough to exercise the vote with reason and good sense.

So, while I would not break a lance over Kwayana’s popular formulation as to how the PPP’s call to register was put to crowds, it was certainly not only a case of being able to marry and fight at 18, it was much more than that.

The point to note here though is that Burnham somersaulted from vote at 18 to vote at 21 because it was clear to him that the PPP would win elections outright; both he and Kwayana wanted to block that from happening.

As regards the imbroglio at the Houston constituency in the 1961 elections, this matter has been weaponized by others just as Eusi did in this letter, claiming that ‘the PPP was not a model of electoral purity.’

In his ‘West on Trial’, Cheddi Jagan wrote: “We had no direct responsibility for the conduct of the 1961 elections; it was conducted under the authority of a British official holding the office of Chief Secretary and under the direct supervision of an Electoral Officer who was an Englishman.”

As regards the registration of voters, the Chief Electoral Officer took every care to ensure scrupulously fairness in registration. It was the PPP which called in the police when it became known that attempts were being made to pad the list for the Houston Constituency, for which a by-election was pending.

A statement made by the Attorney General on March 27, 1963, in connection with the registration of voters pointed out that the investigations which are being made by the police into the supplementary Voters’ List for the Houston Constituency are not complete but an interim report concerning 686 names already investigated discloses the following: ‘’The number of voters seen out of a total of 686 so far investigated amounts to 294. Of the latter number, 15 persons are under the voting age. Of the remaining names, 79 were never heard of at all and 204 are alleged to (Turn to page 7)

6

House-to-house de-registration is unconstitutional Dear Editor,

I

t is now public knowledge that without the support of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) nominated Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Commissioners, GECOM is moving to house-to-house registration. It is also public knowledge that this decision of GECOM is a direct response to a call from Congress Place. I feel impelled to reiterate that since his appointment, the Chairman of GECOM has concurred, by use of his casting vote when necessary, with every position advocated by Congress Place and the Government nominated GECOM Commissioners.

The move to house-to-house registration is said to be predicated upon the ground that the Voters’ List is “bloated” with dead persons and persons who have migrated. The reason proffered for this proposed exercise is to sanitise the list of these two categories of occupants.

It cannot be disputed that the List can be cleansed of dead persons by a simple engagement between the Chief Elections Officer and the Office of the Registrar General.

Such an engagement of comparing the relevant data and making the adjustments can be accomplished with relative ease within a fortnight. Naturally, this does not require the tedious, expansive and anachronistic methodology of a house-to-house inspection – a process to which there is rarely resort in this technological age, elsewhere.

However, it is the decision to resort to house-to-house registration with the express intention of removing persons from the List, who maybe out of Guyana, which agitates my apprehension. In my considered view, such an exercise is fraught with hazards, including, the violation of the Constitution and the constitutional rights of qualified electors to vote and creating the potential for a subsequent vitiation of the entire elections.

A convenient point to begin is perhaps

Article 59 of the Constitution. It provides thus: “Subject to the provisions of article 159, every person may vote at an election if he or she is of age eighteen years or upwards and is either a citizen of Guyana or a Commonwealth citizen domiciled and resident in Guyana.”

Article 159 provides that no one shall vote at an election unless he is registered as an elector and a person shall be qualified to be so registered, if on the qualifying day, that person is eighteen years and over and a citizen of Guyana or, a Commonwealth citizen, who is domiciled and resident in Guyana for a period of one year immediately preceding the qualifying date.

The bewildering construction recently placed on the Constitution, notwithstanding, it is excruciatingly clear that neither residency nor domicile within the State of Guyana are qualifications, which a citizen of Guyana must possess before he is eligible for to vote or to be registered as an elector. The natural corollary is the lack of residency and domicile within the State of Guyana cannot be the basis for disqualifying a person from being registered or from voting. In short, a Guyanese, residing either permanently or temporarily in Timbuktu, once he or she is eighteen years and over is qualified to be registered and, if registered, is qualified to vote. At this juncture, it is apposite that I emphasize that by acquiring citizenship of another country, a Guyanese citizen, does not necessarily lose his/her Guyanese citizenship. He/she remains a citizen of Guyana and, therefore, qualifies to be registered and, if registered, qualifies to vote. So, while dual citizens are disqualified from being elected, they are not disqualified from being electors.

GECOM is now proceeding on a houseto-house registration to create a new List of National Registrants from which the Preliminary Voters’ List will be extracted and this is being done with the stated intention of excluding persons, who will be absent from

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019 Guyana during the exercise. Consequently, those persons who are currently duly registered and are on the List and but absent from Guyana are now going to be intentionally excluded from the List in this proposed process, as this is one of the stated purpose of this exercise. In other words, these persons are going to be de-registered and thereby disqualified from voting and denied their constitutional right to vote, through no fault of theirs.

The ultimate consequence of this decision of GECOM is that GECOM is, indirectly, adding a new qualifying requirement to vote, which is not provided for by the Constitution, and which is ultra vires the Constitution: that requirement is “residency within Guyana.” This is clearly unlawful and unconstitutional.

It is this identical issue which formed the basis of Justice Claudette Singh’s decision vitiating the 1997 elections. The Judge found that the Election Laws Amendment Acts No. 12 of 1996 and No. 22 of 1997 were unconstitutional and void, in that they sought to add to the qualifications or disqualifications of electors prescribed by articles 59 and 159 of the Constitution by imposing the requirement of a Voter ID card.

Her Honour, cited the dictum of Hamilton J in the case of Greidlinger v Davis 9887 Fed. 2d 1344 (4th Cir 1993): “It is axiomatic that no right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must live. Other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is undermined.”

And then Justice Singh observed thus: “It becomes clear then, that any prohibition, restriction or limitation on the right to vote must be viewed with a close and critical eye since any such encroachment would be a bar to that voter’s right to have a voice in the elections of his representatives in government.” In Reynolds v Sims 377 US 554 at 1378, Chief Justice Warren posits “It has been repeatedly recognised that all qualified voters have a constitutionally protected right to vote.” Approving, this dictum Justice Singh held that in Guyana the right to vote of a qualified elector is a constitutionally protected right.

Moreover, in Krammer v Union School District 395 US 627 at 1889, Chief Justice Warren’s criticisms of statutes denying the right to vote are apposite: “Any unjustified discrimination in determining who may participate in political affairs or in the selection of public officials undermines the legitimacy of representative government. Thus, state apportionment statutes, which may dilute the effectiveness of some citizens’ votes, receive close scrutiny from this Court- No less

rigid an examination is applicable to statutes denying the franchise to citizens who are otherwise qualified by residence or age.”

It is submitted that although Chief Justice Warren’s objections were directed to statutes his admonitions apply with equal force to actions, decisions and processes that have like, similar or identical consequences on the right to vote.

In the Esther Perriera case Justice Claudette Singh examined the two pieces of legislation to determine the “pith and substance” of their effect and found that “The constitutional right to vote would be denied to any person who did not produce such a card” but who would otherwise have been qualified to vote under the Constitution.

Reverting to the situation at hand: there are thousands of citizens of Guyana, 18 years and over, who are currently registered and therefore, qualified to vote (which as the legal authorities cited above established is a constitutional right) and who intends to vote at the next elections; however, these persons are overseas and plan to return home to vote when the date for elections are fixed; the decision of GECOM to embark upon a house to house registration which will result in a new voter’s list will exclude those persons if they are not present in Guyana. As a result, this exercise by GECOM will, therefore, disqualify these persons since they would be excluded from the new list, thereby depriving them of a constitutional right to vote, which they now enjoy ,without any fault of theirs, as it cannot be doubted that the “pith and substance” of this exercise is to cleanse the list of these persons who are currently qualified to vote. This, I submit must be unconstitutional.

Speaking of the agreement between all the parties in Parliament to the use of the Voter’s ID card which consequently led to the unanimous passage of the two pieces of legislation referred to above, Justice Claudette Singh issued the following exhortation: “It follows therefore, that no political party can arrogate unto itself the power to barter away or waive the constitutional right of members of the electorate. The voice of members of the electorate to speak through the ballot cannot be silenced by arrogant agreements among political parties. Even Parliament cannot do so since the voice of members of the electorate to speak through the ballot is a constitutional right under Article 59.”

If the political parties nor even Parliament can do it by ordinary legislation, GECOM certainly cannot do it by house to house registration!

Sincerely, Anil Nandlall, PPP/C MP

House-to-House de-registration will violate my constitutional right Dear Editor,

I

recently celebrated my 22nd birthday. I am currently residing in Canada studying at Ted Rogers School of Management: Ryerson University, after which I have full intentions of pursuing an international career and then return to Guyana to serve my country.

I came across an interesting read this morning, a piece penned by the Former Attorney General, Anil Nandlall, where he spoke about the Government wanting to re-

move people from the Official Voter’s List.

I registered myself at the Better Hope Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Office during a period of continuous registration sometime around my 16th birthday. I have since lost that card I received owing to my wallet being stolen. I even went to GECOM to get a replacement. The registration process for young people is not a difficult one.

The government spouting about young people being disenfranchised is a farce, in my opinion, to enrage the general population and delay elections.

Editor my beef today is the violation of my constitutional right. Under Article 59 of the Constitution, I am able to vote seeing that I am a Guyanese citizen and I have attained the age of 18. However, removing me from the voter’s list will deny me of this right. I was able to vote in 2015 as elections were held a few months after my birthday. I am very invested in the future of my country as I am only a citizen of Guyana. Denying me of my right to vote is a gross violation of my constitutional rights that I believed I was given the day I was born 22nd years ago.

The Government’s plan for house to house de-registration will not only violate my constitutional rights, but many other citizens of Guyana. Guyana sends students by the 100s aboard to gain tertiary education with the aim of increasing our human capital. Taking our right to elect a democratic Government is undemocratic.

The Government needs to re-think this decision.

Sincerely, Nutana Singh

7

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

What ever happened to “let us co-operate for Guyana” Mr. Granger?

Dear Editor,

Is the discussion on the future of oil W and the maritime industries now being hijacked by special interests?

Dear Editor,

A

rather unusual event took place on Wednesday, March 27, 2019 – one that raised several questions in my mind.

I am referring to the ‘Guyana’s New Maritime Landscape – Preparing for the Future’ conference, which was hosted by the Hughes, Fields & Stoby law firm and Cerulean Master Card under the rubric of the Guyana Maritime Administration at the Marriott Hotel.

The invitation, which was dispatched to many people by Nigel Hughes on behalf of Hughes Fields & Stoby, advised that: “Guyana’s national efforts to prepare for the advent of the commercial production of oil have necessitated a revisit of our existing legal and regulatory framework for several industries and particularly for the maritime industry. The current legal and regulatory maritime framework is inadequate for the development of the oil and gas industry which is upon us. In order to meet this challenge the Maritime Authority of Guyana (MARAD) has determined that it will host a conference on the 27th March 2019 at the Marriott where it hopes to benefit from the contributions of the stakeholders in the maritime industry as it sets about the task of crafting draft laws and regulations for the new maritime regime….the conference will address four themes namely Legal and Institutional Considerations to Enhance Governance of Guyana’s Maritime Industry, Industry best practices among the oil majors for self-regulation, Lessons Learnt, and New rules and regulations for enforcement.”

One should remember that in September 2018, the same firm at the launching of its office in Houston, Texas said: “Long before a potential investor even arrives in Guyana, the law offices of Hughes, Fields & Stoby will now be on hand in Houston, Texas to guide clients through what could be a complex process of establishing business relationships in Guyana…From legal representation right through to assistance with the appropriate business protocols and linkage to a network of officials in the public and private sector, a client’s every need is attended to in ensuring the doors to doing business in Guyana are easily and readily open.”

So the first set of questions relate to the organisation and funding of the Conference.

Why was the Guyana Maritime Administration not taking the lead in inviting people? Even on their website, there is no information about the conference nor its agenda, just the announcement.

Why was Hughes, Fields & Stoby the “producer of the event” as stated on the flyer?

Who was paying for the conference, and the presenters – Mr Colin Young, Regional Advisor, Caribbean, International Maritime Organisation; Ms Vivian Rambarath-Parasram, Program Leader, Maritime Studies of University of Trinidad and Tobago; Professor Eric Smith, Professor of Practice at the AB Freeman School of Business at Tulane University; Thomas Steigerwald, Maritime consultant and Retired Rear Admiral United States Coast Guard James Olson? Did the other companies named in the conference document – Guyana Shore Base Inc, Global Maritime Consultants Group, and GAICO contribute to the funding?

Who paid Hughes Fields & Stoby to produce this Maritime conference? Certainly, I do not think MARAD could have had the money to do so.

The second set of questions relate to policymaking.

“The Vision” in the conference brochure is written by C.A. Nigel Hughes as Managing Partner of Hughes Fields & Stoby. The fact that the vision had no vision is not surprising, but here is the vision being propagated by a gentleman who is representing the interests of the oil investors.

One wonders whether the government has relinquished or parceled out policymaking of our national concerns and interests to Nigel Hughes, Managing Partner of a company that is facilitating and benefitting financially from the oil interests.

Who is representing Guyana’s interests?

Or will we be seeing a repetition of the 2016 secret agreement with Exxon et al that sold our national patrimony down the line?

Why was the Ministry of Foreign Affairs not present as there are maritime issues with regards to our international treaty obligations as well as specific concerns with regards to our maritime boundaries and the oil sector?

Why were local companies which are involved in the maritime industry, and other stakeholders in this sector not included in the panelists? One wonders, after examining this line up at the conference, if the draft local content policy touted by the government is just another window dressing.

Finally, has the discussion on the future of oil and the maritime industries now being hijacked to special interests and not national interests?

Yours faithfully, Darion Comacho

ith thousands of young people entering the workforce each year, fiscal resources severely constrained, and economic, social and political risks on the rise, Guyana is at a defining moment in its history. Bolstering the private sector is critical to meet this challenge. However, the key to success remains elusive principally because there is no trust between the regime and the real engine of economic growth (the business community).

Additionally this policy arrogance on the part of Team Granger is fueled by a myth that these oil investments will bring an end to all of Guyana’s troubles and thus a marginalized private sector is no big deal. But the empirical evidence points to a different outcome if these oil resources are not managed transparently and with a long term, sensible and efficient work plan.

The key to Guyana’s success remains to urgently unlock the latent energy of private investments on land, (both local and foreign) which will have a direct impact on the lives of the people. That will take genuine policy reforms to increase access to finance for the private sector and improve the effectiveness of the public sector. Until that happens, we are wasting time in Guyana. The bottom line remains, there is an urgent need for a smaller government and a bigger private sector; not the other way around. This is the ideological shift that Team Granger is struggling to appreciate.

They have actually expanded the public sector by some 10% since May 2015 and have taken active steps towards crowding out the private sector.

The ratio of private investment to GDP at the end of 2018 is expected to be under 20% of GDP based on the latest projections (the Minister is yet to release the 2018 End of Year Report with final numbers and it is almost April 2019). With such low

confidence in the economy by the private sector, there will be adverse effects on the economic health of the nation. This will directly impact the economic well-being of the people especially those residing at the bottom half of the economy who live mainly in rural and hinterland Guyana. This lack of confidence is creating blockages for the nation in accessing the necessary technological innovations that can bring the promised economic empowerment and upliftment truly needed by the people. For all the years that Guyana existed as an independent nation, we are still a raw material producer in the main and to rub salt into our wounds, now Jamaica is exporting pigeon peas in tins to Guyana. This is something we used to do on our own but are no longer capable of doing at a commercial level.

The challenge is real, the quality of the school leavers are at the lowest level ever, the few infrastructure improvements are mired in massive problems and the capability levels in the Cabinet Room and at the Head of Department level in the public service are just plain downright incompetent.

These people just cannot get the job done.

The need for policy action to boost private investment is more critical than ever in Guyana. Policymakers need to focus on surrounding themselves with the best minds and on the necessary reforms that can help the nation catch up with their peers on education, infrastructure, financial development, and governance. These reforms would help offset the headwinds from global factors outside the nation’s control.

For us to succeed, the days of ethnic marginalization must be over. This voyage demands all hands on deck to shore up the nation’s economic resilience for the future.

Can they do it? What ever happened to “let us co-operate for Guyana” Mr. Granger?

Yours faithfully, Sasenarine Singh

Those who claim that... have left the constituency.”

The police also stated that of the 686 claims investigated out of a total of 1,507 registered names, 109 (including two believed dead) could not be found at all.

Dr. Jagan concluded: “We did not object to changes in the arrangements for the registration of voters and the conduct of the election but we deplored the attempt of the British government to impute misconduct by insinuations and falsehoods in order to discredit us.”

In the midst of independence talks and country-wide disturbances resulting from violence unleashed on the basis of the PNC’s X-13 plan during the 1962 to 1964 period, some who have weaponized the Houston debacle, refused to recognise that it was the British and not the PPP’s responsibility to offer an explanation to the public about the events at Houston.

But the more important question was, who were the culprits who had inserted the 109 electoral impurities on the Houston con-

(From page 5)

stituency voters’ list?

British elections officials were in charge of elections at the time, but they never wanted to pronounce on the matter since the objective was to have a weak and not a stable government though the PPP, beyond all expectations, had won 20 out of the 36 seats.

Through the annals of history, the practice of rigged elections has plagued Guyana.

And seven out of every ten Guyanese at home and abroad, know who the practitioners of electoral fraud in Guyana are. The culprit’s rap sheet is in the public domain.

Those who claim that the PPP was/is ‘not a model of electoral purity’ must provide incontrovertible evidence, whether from the British archives or from the reports of any of the international observer missions who observed elections in this country during the days of the old or modern PPP, to justify their case.

Yours faithfully, Clement J. Rohee

8

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

GECOM starts training of staff for house-to-house registration

D

espite objections from the Parliamentary Opposition, the Opposition-nominated Commissioners at the Guyana Elections Commission

(GECOM) and other stakeholders, GECOM, over the weekend initiated training for thousands of workers required for its new national house-to-house registration

exercise.

GECOM’s Public Relations Officer (PRO) Yolanda Ward, has disclosed that the new national house-to-house registration could begin as

early as mid-May or the first week of June 2019. Notably, it is around this time that the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) is expected to hand down its ruling in the case

FACT SHEET

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW

CURRENT LIST OF ELECTORS IS VALID The APNU+AFC Coalition has been calling for house-to-house registration, claiming that the list is not ‘sanitised’ and that young people – first time voters - will be disenfranchised since their names would not be on the list.

So what are the facts? » Chief Elections Officer (CEO) of the Guyana Elections Commission, Keith Lowenfield, on February 5, 2019, declared that the List of Electors was, in fact, clean. » GECOM, less than four months ago, conducted a Local Government Elections on November 12, 2018 with the current List of Electors. None of the political parties, or independent groups and candidates, objected to the List that was used. There were no challenges based on the List of Voters that was used either. » The claim that first time voters being disenfranchised is another fallacy. The Coalition Government argues that persons who turned 18-years-old are not on the Voters’ List. The fact is that the Voters’ List has been updated during several cycles of Continuous Registration that were conducted by GECOM. So there is little chance of young persons, who are eligible to vote, being left off the Voters’ List. » The current Voters’ List was derived from a ‘Continuous Registration, Claims and Objections’ process, which ended October 2018. After such a process the List becomes valid for six months. The current List will expire on April 30, 2019. » Once a cycle of Continuous Registration has commenced anyone who will be 14-years-old or older by that time and is a Guyanese citizen by birth, descent, naturalization, or is a citizen from a Commonwealth country living in Guyana for one year or more, is eligible for registration during this exercise. During this registration exercise, persons who are eligible for registration are required to visit one of GECOM’s 28 Registration Offices across the 10 Regions, to apply for registration. » Not allowing someone who attained the age of 14 at the time that the cycle of Continuous Registration commenced to register is an offence. Section 6 of the National Registration Act, Chapter, 19:08, makes it obligatory for persons who meet the registration criteria to apply for registration. Persons eligible for registration could be prosecuted, fined and/or even sent to prison for failing or refusing to apply for registration. In the case of eligible persons under the age of 18 years by the qualifying date, the parents/guardians could be prosecuted for failure/refusal to apply for registration. » Article 42 of the Constitution provides entitlement for citizens of Guyana to be so registered. » GECOM’s website states: “Subsequent to the 2001 General and Regional Elections, political parties had agitated for legislative changes which would ensure that a new system of voter registration guarantees Guyanese in general, but more specifically their own supporters, their Constitutional right to be registered and vote at future General, Regional and Local Government Elections. This led to the introduction of Continuous Registration with two primary objectives i.e. (1) introducing a system which would ensure that all eligible persons are afforded unlimited opportunities to become registered on the National Register of Registrants Database and (2), ensuring that GECOM is in a perpetual state of preparedness which would enable it to respond to calls for elections in a timely manner thus guaranteeing eligible persons their Constitutional right to become registered in accordance with the relevant legal provisions and to cast their ballots at future General, Regional and Local Government Elections.” » GECOM is a creature of the Constitution. As an autonomous agency its responsibility is to comply with the Constitution – in this case that means readying itself for General and Regional Elections, which are due by March 21, 2019, following the successful passage of the no-confidence motion that resulted in the fall of the APNU+AFC Coalition Government. » Article 162 (1) of the Constitution states clearly that: “The Elections Commission shall have such functions connected with or relating to the registration of electors or the conduct of elections as are conferred upon it by or under this Constitution or, subject thereto, any Act of Parliament; and, subject to the provisions (of ) this Constitution, the Commission – a) shall exercise general direction and supervision over the registration of electors and the administrative conduct of all elections of members of the National Assembly; and b) shall issue such instructions and take such action as appear to it necessary or expedient to ensure impartiality, fairness and compliance with the provisions of this Constitution or of any Act of Parliament on the part of persons exercising powers or performing duties connected with or relating to the matters aforesaid.”

DESPITE THESE FACTS, THE APNU+AFC COALITION HAS BEEN INSTIGATING THEIR SUPPORTERS TO ECHO A MISPLACED CALL FOR A HOUSE-HOUSE REGISTRATION. THE POSITION TAKEN BY THE APNU+AFC COALITION IS A CLEAR PLOY TO DELAY CONSTITUTIONALLY DUE GENERAL AND REGIONAL ELECTIONS.

challenging the validity of the no-confidence motion.

If the ruling uphold the validity of the vote, Guyana could be heading into early Elections. However, a new national house-to house registration will delay General and Regional Elections by nine months, at least.

GECOM is using schools as the locations for its training sessions. The training sessions are expected to con-

tinue for the next six to eight weeks. After the training, offices will be set up across the country, from which field staff will operate under the direction of AROs, who will report to the 27 Registration Officers already employed

by GECOM. A total of 1,332 persons are expected to be trained as enumerators and Assistant Registration Officers (AROs).

PPP/C will be ‘vigilant’ of any attempt to register people who should not be on Voters’ List - Jagdeo

M

aintaining that there is no need for a new national house-tohouse registration at this time, Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo, contends that the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) is wary of the rush to have it done.

Nonetheless, he made clear that the PPP/C will take steps to ensure the integrity of the registration process. “We will be vigilant…we are a Party that has very good grassroots support all across the country and so we will be looking out for the interest of Guyana to ensure that we have the process done properly but that is only if necessary….this is not business as usual from our side too. We’ll be very vigilant of any attempt to register people who should not be registered and to ensure that everyone gets on the list,” he said.

Notably, the PPP had recommended that houseto-house registration be done in 2015, but the Commission refused and pursued two cycles of continuous registration, instead, that year.

Meanwhile, in April 2018, the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR), the largest party in the coalition govern-

ment, called for house-tohouse registration to clean up the voters’ list – a call that came mere months before the November 2018 Local Government Elections were due to be held.

PNCR General Secretary Amna Ally had suggested that a registration should begin as soon as possible.

The PPP, in a statement in response to Ally, had said it did not support the PNCR’s call for new house-to-house registration.

The last house-tohouse registration, in which persons 14 years and older were registered, was conducted in 2008.

The voter’ list has since been updated through continuous registration cycles. The last cycle of continuous registration was held in July 2018.

Following this process, the Voters’ List was updated and used for the 2018 Local Government Elections. The Parliamentary Opposition has pointed out that there were no complaints about the Voters’ List used for the 2018 Local Government Elections – a fact that exposes the call for houseto-house registration as attempt to delay the General and Regional Elections.

9

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

Lowenfield told to halt move to house-to-house registration or face legal charges T

he decision of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) to resort to house-to-house registration “with the express intention of removing persons” from the Voters’ List is a move that is “fraught with hazards, including, the violation of the Constitution and the constitutional rights of qualified electors to vote and creating the potential for a subsequent vitiation of the entire elections,” according to former Attorney General Anil Nandlall.

And in an April 2, 2019 letter to the Chief Elections Officer, Keith Lowenfield, these and other concerns were communicated, as was the demand for Lowenfield to refrain from embarking on or, proceeding with, a new national house-to-house registration.

The letter penned by Nandlall to Lowenfield was done on behalf of Opposition-nominated GECOM Commissioner, Robeson Benn.

Lowenfield was given seven days to respond. “After seven days, I will assume that you have rejected my demand and I will have no alternative but to advise my client to institute legal proceedings against you, to restrain you from embarking on, or proceeding with, the aforesaid house-to-house registration,” Nandlall write.

Substantiating his demand, the former Attorney General noted that the move to house-to-house registration is said to be predicated upon the ground that the Voters’ List is “bloated” with dead persons and persons who have migrated.

He wrote, “The reason proffered for this proposed exercise is to sanitise the list of these two categories of occupants. It cannot be disputed that the List can be cleansed of dead persons by a simple engagement between the Chief Elections Officer and the Office of the Registrar General. Such an engagement of comparing the relevant data and making the adjustments can be accomplished with relative ease within a fortnight. Naturally, this does not require the tedious, expansive and anachronistic methodology of a house-to-house inspection – a process to which there is rarely resort in this technological age, elsewhere.

“However, it is the decision to resort to house-tohouse registration with the express intention of remov-

ing persons from the List, who maybe out of Guyana that agitates my apprehension.”

The former Attorney General cited Articles 59 and 159 of the Constitution. Article 59 states that: “Subject to the provisions of article 159, every person may vote at an election if he or she is of age eighteen years or upwards and is either a citizen of Guyana or a Commonwealth citizen domiciled and resident in Guyana.” Article 159 provides that no one shall vote at an election unless he is registered as an elector and a person shall be qualified to be so registered, if on the qualifying day, that person is eighteen years and over and a citizen of Guyana or, a Commonwealth citizen, who is domiciled and resident in Guyana for a period of one year immediately preceding the qualifying date.

As such, he said, “It is excruciatingly clear that neither residency nor domicile within the State of Guyana are qualifications, which a citizen of Guyana must possess before he is eligible for to vote or to be registered as an elector. The natural corollary is the lack of residency and domicile within the State of Guyana cannot be the basis for disqualifying a person from being registered or from voting. In short, a Guyanese, residing either permanently or temporarily in Timbuktu, once he or she is eighteen years and over is qualified to be registered and, if registered, is qualified to vote. At this juncture, it is apposite that I emphasize that by acquiring citizenship of another country, a Guyanese citizen, does not necessarily lose his/her Guyanese citizenship. He/she remains a citizen of Guyana and, therefore, qualifies to be registered and, if registered, qualifies to vote. So, while dual citizens are disqualified from being elected, they are not disqualified from being electors.

“GECOM is now proceeding on a house-to-house registration to create a new List of National Registrants from which the Preliminary Voters’ List will be extracted and this is being done with the stated intention of excluding persons, who will be absent from Guyana during the exercise. Consequently, those persons who are currently duly registered and are on the List and, therefore, now qualified to vote but absent from Guy-

Opposition-nominated GECOM Commissioners forced to walk out in protest of Chairman’s autocratic approach

T

he April 2, 2019, statutory meeting of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) ended after the Opposition-nominated GECOM Commissioners were forced to walk out, in protest of the Chairman James Patterson’s refusal to allow Commissioners to participate in a fixed agenda item that is under ‘Commissioners’ Comments’.

A statement from the Opposition-nominated GECOM Commissioners – Robeson Benn and Sase Gunraj – said, “Chairman Patterson in the most autocratic manner was seemingly intent on only allowing continued discussion on “Elections” arising out of House-to-House Registration, a matter on which discussion ended abruptly at the last Statutory Meeting of Tuesday, March 26, 2019.”

1. The statement added that it is evident that the Chairman in collusion with the Government-nominated Commissioners, intended to avoid any references to key issues.

These issues include: The scathing Editorial by Stabroek News in its April 1, 2019 edition, which exposed the Chairman’s preference and behavior relating to the Vishnu Persaud matter which engaged the attention of the Ethnic Relations Commis-

sion; 2. A letter proposing legal proceedings, under the hand of Mohabir Anil Nandlall, Attorney-at-Law representing Commissioner Robeson Benn, requesting that GECOM CEO Keith Lowenfield, inter alia “…refrain from embarking on or proceeding with this unlawful and unconstitutional exercise…,” that being House-toHouse Registration; 3. The ongoing legal proceedings at the Caribbean Court of Justice, arising out of the No-Confidence motion which was passed in the National Assembly on 21st December 2018, in which GECOM was added as a party.

The Opposition nominated GECOM Commissioners said, “In view of the Chairman’s attempts to avoid initial comments and to proceed with an agenda item not listed or agreed to, Commissioners Sase Gunraj and Benn, in the absence of Commissioner Bibi Shaddick, were forced to walkout of the meeting, while protesting the undemocratic posture of the Chairman with support of the Government’s Commissioners.”

This is the latest statutory meeting of GECOM that ended in controversy.

Framers of the Constitution... (From page 2)

ana, are now going to be intentionally excluded from the List in this proposed process, as this is one of the stated purpose of this exercise. In other words, these persons are going to be de-registered and thereby disqualified from voting and denied their constitutional right to vote, through no fault of theirs.

“The ultimate consequence of this decision of

GECOM is that GECOM is, indirectly, adding a new qualifying requirement to vote, which is not provided for by the Constitution, and which is ultra vires the Constitution: that requirement is ‘residency within Guyana’.

This is clearly unlawful and unconstitutional.”

The letter was copied to the Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission, James Patterson.

acknowledgement that AFC and APNU had the 33 votes that were needed for their no-confidence motion to be successful.

He added that prior to the December 21, 2018 vote the Coalition Government boasted that it had 33 votes and, therefore, the no-confidence motion could not be passed with a vote of 32. Leader of Government Business in the National Assembly, Prime Minister, Moses Nagamootoo, had said, “The Constitution, our law, says that in order for a motion of no-confidence to pass it must have a majority of elected members of the National Assembly. I repeat that, it must have a majority of ALL elected members of the National Assembly. Our National Assembly has 65 Members. It means that the motion of no-confidence, in order to pass, must have 33 Members who are elected Members of the National Assembly. The Opposition does not have that.

It is the Government that has 33 Members who are elected and sitting in the National Assembly.”

After the vote, according to him, both President

David Granger and Nagamootoo, accepted that the PPP/C no-confidence motion was validly passed in the House. Immediately after the vote on the night of December 21, 2018, Nagamootoo said, “The confidence motion was put the floor and the no-confidence motion was passed.

The options that are available after a no-confidence motion is passed in the House is dictated by the Constitution, Article 106….the Government remains in office until such time as elections are called…. the Constitution says elections in 90 days….The process in the National Assembly was an open and transparent process….Parliamentary democracy triumphed.” However, between December 21, 2018 and January 2, 2019, the position of the APNU+AFC Coalition Government changed.

The matter, having been ruled on by the Appeal Court, is now before the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). The only remaining argument in the challenge to the validity of the no-confidence motion is that 34 votes was needed for the no-confidence motion to pass, not 33.

10

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

From the desk of Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo...

Guyana Under Review Several issues were addressed a weekly news conference held by Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo, on Wednesday (April 3, 2019), ranging from misinformation relating to the justifications for new national house-to-house registration and the implication of such a move to controversial actions involving the spouse of Housing Minister, Valerie Patterson-Yearwood.

PPP/C MPs with dual Coalition’s lack of sincerity in citizenship submit complying with Appeal Court resignation letters ruling exposed ‒ Two of three will renounce foreign citizenship

R

esignation letters have been submitted to the Leader of the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) Lists of Candidates, Donald Ramotar, by PPP/C Parliamentarians with dual citizenship – Gail Teixeira, Adrian Anamayah and Odinga Lumumba – in line with the ruling of the Appeal Court which stated that persons holding dual citizenship are ineligible to sit in the National Assembly.

This is according to Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo, who, on Wednesday (April 3, 2019) during his weekly news conference, also disclosed that resignation letters will also be sent to the Speaker of the House, Dr Barton Scotland, early in the new week.

The requirement to send letters to both the Leader of Party Lists of Candidates, as well as the House Speaker, is stipulated in the Constitution.

Article 156 (1) (a) of the Constitution states that: “A member of the National Assembly shall vacate his or her seat therein – if he or she resigns it by writing under his or her own hand addressed to the Speaker or,

if the Office of the Speaker if vacant or the Speaker is absent from Guyana, to the Deputy Speaker.”

Also, Article 156 (3) states that: “A member of the National Assembly elected on a List shall cease to be a member of the Assembly, if: a) He or she declares in writing to the Speaker or to the Representative of the List from which his or her name was extracted that he or she will not support the List from which his or her name was extracted; b) He or she declares in writing to the Speaker or to the Representative of the List from which his or her name was extracted, his or her support for another List; and c) The Representative of List from which his or her name was extracted indicates in writing to the Speaker that after meaningful consultation with the Party or Parties that make up the List that the Party or Parties have lost confidence in that member and the representative of the List issues a written notice of recall to that member and forwards a copy of that notice to the Speaker.”

Article 156 (4) (a) states that: “The Speaker shall de-

clare the seat of a Member of the National Assembly vacant where – a) The Speaker receives a written declaration of the Member of the National Assembly as provided for in paragraph 3 (a) or (b); b) The Representative of the List issues a notice of recall as provided for in paragraph 3 (c).”

On the issue of renunciation of dual citizenship, Jagdeo disclosed that Teixeira has already started the process and Lumumba will start the process soon. “Adrian Anamayah has explained to me that there are family obligations and other issues so he will not renounce because of those commitments,” he said.

The three PPP/C Parliamentarians, according to Jagdeo, are the only ones with dual citizenship.

Prior to the Appeal Court ruling – which upheld the ruling made by the High Court on January 31, 2019 – there was no interpretation of the Constitutional provision relating to the issue of dual citizenship.

Teixeira hold Canadian citizenship, while Anamayah and Lumumba hold United States of America (USA) citizenship.

T

he “shameful incompetence” of the APNU+AFC Coalition Government has been put on display, yet again, with its failure to address the singular matter of resignations

by Coalition Government Ministers who hold dual citizenship, according to Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo.

During his Wednesday (April 3, 2019) news conference, he noted that in two days, the Ministry of the Presidency released three press statements on the one issue – all of which contradict each other. “It is shamefully incompetent.

They cannot address a single matter coherently,” he said.

On Tuesday (April 2, 2019), the Ministry of the Presidency released a statement that said: “As of Monday, April 1, 2019, His Excellency David Granger, President of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana, has received and accepted the resignation of all coalition Members of Parliament who are holders of dual citizenship.”

Hours later, on Tuesday (April 2, 2019) afternoon, as second statement from the Ministry of the Presidency said: “Cabinet is satisfied that the resignation of four ministers as Government Members of Parliament fully accords with the decision of the courts. The MPs are Messrs Carl Greenidge, Joseph Harmon, Dominic Gaskin and Dr. Rupert Roopnarine who HELD ministerial portfolios…these portfolios would now be held by sitting members of Cabinet who previously acted for these ministers on leave or out of the jurisdiction.”

Ten hours later, on Wednesday (April 3, 2019), the Ministry of the Presidency, in a third statement said: “The four ministers, Mr. Carl Greenidge, Mr. Joseph Harmon, Mr. Dominic Gaskin and Dr. Rupert Roopnarine will remain ministers…their resignations will not take effect immediately.”

Jagdeo noted that the Coalition Government’s lack of sincerity in complying with the Appeal Court’s

ruling – that persons with dual citizenship are ineligible to sit as Parliamentarians in the National Assembly – is evidenced in the confusion that manifested itself in the three statements from the Ministry of the Presidency. “Clearly these people think Guyanese people are fools….this is another example of duplicitous behaviour of government… on Tuesday, we heard four resigned [and] that their portfolios will now be held by others ministers and today we are hearing that they will remain as ministers until all the processes are complete,” he said.

The Opposition Leader added, “…they are trying to get out of it and so there is confusion. The lack of sincerity and honesty by this government is reflected in the three press releases they issued in two days…. it is shamefully incompetent that they can’t get their story right…this is a simple matter.”

It is unclear when the resignations of the Coalition Government’s dual citizens will take effect.

Major issues will be raised during overseas visits O

pposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo, on Wednesday (April 3, 2019), when asked, confirmed that he will be travelling to Trinidad and then the United States, this weekend, where he will advance the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C)

position on the political situation in Guyana.

“I will definitely raise these issues where ever I go and so that shouldn’t be a secret,” he said.

According to him, the issues that will be addressed include, house-to-house reg-

istration and developments challenge to the validity of the no-confidence motion.

Notably, PPP Executive Members, Gail Teixeira and Irfaan Ali travelled abroad earlier this year and were involved in several engagements.

11

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

From the desk of Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo...

Guyana Under Review Several issues were addressed a weekly news conference held by Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo, on Wednesday (April 3, 2019), ranging from misinformation relating to the justifications for new national house-to-house registration and the implication of such a move to controversial actions involving the spouse of Housing Minister, Valerie Patterson-Yearwood.

Data from internationally agency demonstrates that claim

by APNU+AFC about Voters’ List being bloated is baseless

T

he false claim that Guyana Voters’ List is bloated was rubbished, yet again, by Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo, during his Wednesday (April 3, 2019) news conference.

Reiterating that the current Voters’ List was used in the November 12, 2018 Local Government Elections (LGE) without complaint from the APNU+AFC Coalition and that the Chief Elections Officer (CEO), on February 5, 2019, declared that the Voters’ List is clean, Jagdeo referred to data from the Sweden-based International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) to substantiate his dismissal of the false claim that the Voters’ List is bloated.

International IDEA develops, shares and enables the use of comparative knowledge in our key impact areas of expertise: electoral processes, constitution-build-

ing, political participation and representation.

A review of the Voters’ Registration Lists from seven countries in the Caribbean make it clear that Guyana’s situation is not new.

International IDEA numbers show that Guyana’s total population is 735,222 and there is a 77.67 per cent representation of Guyanese on the Registration List. In other countries the number is higher: St. Lucia – 98.43 per cent; Dominica – 96.04 per cent; Trinidad and Tobago – 89.93 per cent; and in St. Vincent and the Grenadines – 87.24 per cent.

Jagdeo noted that its data shows that once a country does continuous registration – like Guyana does every six months – the numbers will be what they are. “If they now claim that we have a bloated list, then other countries in the Region have super bloated lists….our people must not fall prey to misin-

formation.

MOTIVE CLEAR According to him, the motive of the push for the unnecessary national Houseto-House registration is clear – it is to delay General and Regional Elections when

they become due.

Jagdeo contends that with the hearing of the challenge to the validity of the no-confidence motion set for May 9-10 at the Caribbean Court of Justice, the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR)-led APNU+AFC

Coalition Government is clearly encouraging the three Government-nominated Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Commissioners and the GECOM Chairman to push for Houseto-House registration.

Notably, the GECOM

Chairman, James Patterson was unilaterally appointed

by President David Granger – an appointment that the Opposition Leader has said “violated” that balance at GECOM to ensure that it functions as an impartial organization.

“I think Congress Place has encouraged its three Commissioners and the Chairman to push for Houseto-House registration, so that it will be a fait accompli by the time the CCJ rules on the case…they are hoping that should CCJ not rule in the Government’s favour, they can argue that Houseto-House registration are already in progress…this is a transparent tactic,” Jagdeo said.

Notably, GECOM’s Chief Elections Officer (CEO), Keith Lowenfield, has indicated that a new national House-to-House registration could take as many as nine months.

Conflict of interest at CH&PA involving Where did the public funds go?

Minister’s husband exposed C oncerns about possible conflict of interest in the Ministry of Communities, specifically in the Housing sector, as well as the dismissal of complaints were addressed by Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo.

During his Wednesday (April 3, 2019) news conference, he explained that the husband of Minister of Housing, Valerie Patterson-Yearwood, has benefited from government contracts – hence the conflict of interest concerns.

The dismissal of complains relates to a documented case where Patterson-Yearwood’s husband sub-contracted out works he was engaged to complete and failed to pay his

sub-contractors.

The Minister married Godfrey Yearwood on August 16, 2017, at her residence in Bel Air Gardens, Georgetown.

Referring to letters from one of the sub-contractors, based on the East Coast of Demerara, Jagdeo noted that President David Granger was written to four times – in May 2018, June 2018, October 2018 and again in March 2019.

“All he received was an acknowledgment….until now nothing has happened…this is what we get from this government…this is an ordinary contractor who is facing hardships,” he said.

Meanwhile, the Housing

Minister Patterson-Yearwood (left), her husband, Godfrey Yearwood (right) and President David Granger (center)

Minister, when presented with the facts, admitted that her husband has a contract under a special housing programme being carried out by the Central Planning Authority (CH&PA). She admitted that he

has direct oversight for the programme. “It’s one contract; I think it’s for two buildings….I am not too au fait with the details,” Patterson-Yearwood said in an attempt to dismiss the concerns raised.

I

nformation that taxpayers’ monies were used on the ‘Too Legit To Quit’ concert held at Parade Ground, Georgetown, last weekend, contradict comments from APNU+AFC Coalition member, James Bond.

Bond, in a social media post, claimed that the event was sponsored by Banks DIH and ANSA McAL. When asked about the issue during his Wednesday (April 3, 2019) news con(Turn to page 12)

12

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

PPP/C details priorities to be included in Manifesto ahead of General and Regional Elections The People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) in consultation with a wide range of stakeholders is working on a detailed Manifesto, which will elaborate on the Party’s policies for improving the lives of all Guyanese.

Some of the priority actions of the next PPP/C Government will be to: 1. Restore– the $10,000 cash grant to school children. The APNU+AFC took away $1.67B per year, a total of $8.35B from Guyanese children.

2. Reinstate the water subsidies to pensioners. The APNU+AFC removed $500M in subsidies per year amounting to a $2.5B burden that had to be paid by our elderly.

3. Reverse VAT on essential services including water, electricity, and health care. The APNU+AFC imposed this on Citizens which led to billions in tax collection from Guyanese people and escalated the cost of living.

4. Reopen the closed sugar estates. Over 7,000 persons lost their jobs directly and another 4,000 lost their livelihoods indirectly.

5. Restore zero-rated VAT for machinery and equipment for agricultural, mining and forestry industries. For example, a tractor or excavator now attracts in excess of $5M in additional taxes.

6. Reverse cost of license and permits for doing business and accessing Government services. The APNU + AFC increased over 200 fees, e.g. vending licenses increased from $12,500 to a burdensome $65,000. This, added to the cost of living, hampered small business development.

7. Reverse land rents and drainage and irrigation charges. These have moved up in varying degrees, from $2,500 to $293,000 per acre, a policy that is suffocating many sectors including agriculture and tourism.

8. Remove age limits on vehicles. The APNU+AFC added at least $1M to the cost per vehicle, an unnecessary hardship for those aspiring to own a vehicle, especially young people.

9. Remove the restriction on used tyres. The imposition of this restriction increased the cost of tyres by 300%.

10. Reverse VAT on exports.

11. Reverse VAT on building materials.

12. Reinstate the joint services bonus. The APNU+AFC in a Grinch-like move took away the Christmas bonus from the joint services.

13. Remove VAT on data. The APNU+AFC has taxed the internet and your cell phone data.

14. Reverse the 2 A.M curfew. The arrogant implementation of this measure has not helped to address the noise nuisance issue and has affected quality of life and hurt job creation and businesses.

In addition to correcting these draconian impositions, the next PPP/C Government pledges to: 1. Create 50,000 jobs in the first five years.

2. Assist small businesses through the implementation of programmes to help small businesses grow by providing technical advice, small grants, loans, and training for workers. Women entrepreneurship will receive special attention.

3. Deliver 8,000 to 10,000 new house lots per year.

4. Implement a programme for affordable financing for home ownership.

5. Deliver quality health care and end drug shortages.

6. Improve the quality of and access to education at every level including offering 20,000 persons online University education.

7. Implement measures to expand the capability and increase the effectiveness of the security forces so that people can once again feel protected in their homes, on the streets and in workplaces.

8. Create conditions for our young people to prosper, realise their dreams and to involve them in all levels of Government.

9. Ensure better working conditions and remuneration for teachers, healthcare workers and other public servants.

10. Improve infrastructure (roads, wharves, bridges, airstrips, drainage etc) in Georgetown, other Towns and Villages across Guyana.

11. Extend and improve Government services and ICT on the Coast and in the Hinterland.

12. Ensure that revenue from Oil and Gas is not squandered and stolen and leads to the improvement of the lives of ALL GUYANESE. 13. Create the conditions and strengthen the institutions to expand and protect the civil, cultural and human rights of all Guyanese.

14. Improve governance, including expanding and strengthening measures aimed at fighting corruption.

15. Protect our national sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The PPP/C has said that it is time to restore Guyana to the path of progress and prosperity.

Since taking office, the APNU+AFC cabal has put forward five budgets, spent $1.3 trillion, borrowed US $ 900M and increased taxes by approximately $88B per annum.

They are spending every year $1.6 B more for food allowances, $1.1B more for rentals, $1.2B more for local travel among other things, as part of their extravagant lifestyle. Meanwhile over 30,000 Guyanese have lost their jobs. The cost of living has skyrocketed and health care, education and quality of life have deteriorated rapidly.

13

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

Janet Jagan was a ‘national leader’ who was fearless in fight for rights, freedom and democracy – Ali N

ational democracy and electoral freedom and the fundamentals on which progressive societies are based, according to People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) presidential candidate, Irfaan Ali. And he stressed that Guyanese can be inspired by the life and work of former president, Janet Jagan, in working to ensure that these fundamentals are defended.

Ali’s comments came at a wreath laying ceremony to mark the 10th death anniversary of Mrs. Jagan at the Babu Jaan on Sunday

(March 31, 2019), which was attended by hundreds.

He said, “We must recommit ourselves in the present struggle, and the struggle today is one in which our parliamentary democracy is at risk, our national democracy is at risk and our electoral freedom is at stake and these are fundamental aspects of a society that is free, of a society that represents the interests and rights of everyone.”

According to him, Mrs. Jagan was a national leader who was fearless in her right for the rights and freedoms for all Guyanese, as well as

for democracy in Guyana.

He said, “Comrade Janet had some distinguished qualities that are needed today as we confront the struggle of a new form of dictatorship; as we confront the struggle that can be inhibitive to our own rights and freedom in this country. And that quality was consciousness. Comrade Janet, at a very young age, was conscious of the environment and circumstances she was surrounded by and she took bold steps and bold decisions in confronting the inadequacies of that environment…her entire life was marked with

struggles at various points.

Even when the PPP came to Government and democracy was restored, her struggles continued and then she lost her lifelong partner then becoming President in a political environment that became very poisoned as a result of the political immaturity; as a result of the way in which the opposition then managed the political aspects of Guyana.”

Addressing the current challenges, the PPP/C presidential candidate stressed that Guyanese can take a page out of Mrs. Jagan’s book. He said, “Today in our coun-

try we are confronted with similar circumstances, we are confronted with circumstances that requires from all of us bold decisions, commitment and a strong sense of consciousness otherwise all that Comrade Janet and Comrade Cheddi and the PPP would have fought for can be lost…we have to be fearless in confronting the challenges and I think comrades that in being fearless we cannot be reckless, so when we have our protests we don’t promote violence, we don’t promote loose behaviour, we don’t promote attacks on

the business community, we protest peacefully and that has also been the tradition of the PPP/C.” The late Janet Jagan was the first female President of Guyana serving from December 19, 1997, to August 11, 1999. She previously served as the first female Prime Minister of Guyana from March 17, 1997, to December 19, 1997. She was born on October 20, 1920, and died on March 28, 2009. In 1950, she was instrumental in forming Guyana’s first political party – the People’s Progressive Party (PPP).

Where did the... (From page 11) ference, Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo, noted that the event was a “political” event. He said, “I will be surprised if Banks DIH and ANSA McAL are endorsing a political event.”

He added that if this is true, there are questions that must be answered relative to where taxpayers’ monies went. “If the event was sponsored, where is the public money that was used?” he questioned, add-

ing that this may very well be a case where there was double counting – meaning that public monies were allocated for the event, but pocketed, while sponsors covered the actual cost of the event.

Notably, since taking office, the APNU+AFC Coalition has been dealing with over 50 corruption scandals – none of which have been frontally addressed by Government officials.

14

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

PPP/C Presidential Candidate continues his national outreach M

eetings continued this week by the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) presidential candidate, Irfaan Ali, in Mahaica, Region 4, as well as in Industry, East Coast Demerara.

Ali has said, “The outreaches are part of a national effort to ensure that I am able to reach out to every stakeholder – farmers, miners, young professionals, women, youths, sugar workers and representatives of every section of society, as well as our party activists – to ensure that we take concerns on board moving forward.”

The PPP/C presidential candidate has stressed that the PPP/C is the only one that can deliver for the Guyanese people. “What we are doing is also an effort to ensure that our people know that our Party is united and strong and capable of returning Guyana and the Guyanese people to the path of prosperity,” he said.

15

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

Gov’t not acting with sincerity on issue of resignation

by Coalition Parliamentarians with dual citizenship O n Tuesday (April 2, 2019) morning a statement from the Ministry of the Presidency stated that President David Granger “received and accepted the resignation of all Coalition Members of Parliament who are holders of dual citizenship.” By Tuesday afternoon, the Coalition Govern-

ment released another statement thanking the all Coalition Members of Parliament who are holders of dual citizenship for their service and announced that their portfolios would now be held by sitting members of Cabinet who previously acted for these ministers on leave or out of the jurisdiction.

ROODI BALGOBIN (RESEARCH ASSISTANT) said: “I do not believe that the Coalition Government is sincere at all, and as it relates to complying with the Constitution, they have proven over and over in just a short period in Office that they do not care about the Constitution.

“Everyone would recall that the Ministers wrote to constitutional agencies directing them in contravention of the Constitution, the President, himself, acted in contravention of the Constitution and appointed a Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) unilaterally, when he was given eighteen names to choose from by the Leader of the Opposition, etc.

“Therefore, based on those actions adumbrated above and many more, I make the statement that they are not sincere about complying with the Constitution. Further, it is my firm belief that after public pressure from the Parliamentary Opposition and civil society they announced boldly that they are resign to hoodwink the people and temper the condemnation of their wanton and constant, almost daily violation, shown for Judiciary and the Constitution.”

However, on Wednesday (April 3, 2019) a third statement stated that the resignation of all Coalition Members of Parliament who are holders of dual citizenship is not in effect.

The contradictory comments have raised questions about the Coalition Government’s

NUTANA SINGH (STUDENT) said: “I saw the initial article before 8:00am. I was confused how early could they have done this since the day was just now starting.

Also, in the first statement, they didn’t release names so who really resigned? The Coalition Government is clearly pussyfooting around with this issue. They have made a mockery Guyana’s courts and the Constitution.

It is saddening knowing.

“What is clear is that the Coalition Government has made it their pattern of action to hold positions conveniently, regardless of the country’s laws. For example, with the no-confidence motion, they said ‘We have the 33 votes’, but after the motion was passed, the position changed to 34 votes being need.

“In the case with the resignation, the Appeal Court made a ruling that said the no-confidence motion was valid – this they accepted and acted on by pushing ahead with instructions to the government-nominated Commissioners at GECOM to have national house-to-house registration. The Appeal Court also ruled that there can be no dual citizens sitting as Members of Parliament – this the government has not yet acted on.

“The whole situation shows that if the Coalition can’t respect the rule of law, we cannot expect compliance.”

sincerity, relative to complying with the ruling of the High Court, as well as the Appeal Court.

This week, the Mirror Newspaper asked Guyanese: Do you think the Coalition Government is sincere about complying with the Constitution?

ZAHEER BAKSH (GRAPHIC ARTIST) said: “This government during their time in office continues to amaze me with their bare face duplicity. You asked if they are going to be sincere about respecting the decision of the Appeal Court and upholding the Constitution.

The question is a bit laughable. The Coalition Government has demonstrated, time and time again, that the country’s Constitution will not be respected.

“They are focused on enjoying their ‘Good Life’ – a good life that the Guyanese work hard and pay our taxes to support. All their gimmicks to show the public that they are saints will not work. The Government has been exposed as wolves in sheep’s clothing.

“Having seen their action in office, if we Guyanese fall for their empty words again, then they will not hold back in doing whatever they feel like doing. They are right now willing to do anything to stay in power, even if it means stepping on our heads, and we have seen that already.

I do hope we as Guyanese can stand up and remind them that is WE put them there and it is WE than can remove them.”

The consensus was that the APNU+AFC Coalition has not acted with sincerity relative to its claims about compliance with the Appeal Court ruling nor the Constitution of Guyana.

Rose Hall Estate workers attached to Albion Estate on strike F NALINI SINGH (PR CONSULTANT) said: “The Coalition Government cherry picks and abides by what is most suitable to their selfish agenda. They were elected by countless “young people” on the pretext of providing us with jobs, they can suddenly find four jobs for these former ministers.

“I don’t believe they are sincere about anything expect advanced their own agendas. The announcement was made after the Opposition Leader stated that they should resign or give up their foreign citizenship. They chose to resign from their ministerial positions. Recently I saw that they are giving up their citizenships, I don’t believe they will actually go through with this. I believe they are just telling the people what they believe they want to hear to be elected. I don’t believe anything they say anymore.

They are only interested in further their own self-interest and not the average citizen.”

ield workers, who previously worked with the Rose Hall Estate and who have been transferred to the Albion Sugar Estate, are demanding their severance pay and contend that efforts are afoot to frustrate them – a ploy to force them to leave the job.

On Wednesday (April 3, 2019), the workers staged a picketing exercise outside the old Rose Hall Estate compound, chanting “Severance!

Severance. No wuk.”

Workers are upset over the working conditions at the Albion Estate. Speaking with the media, the workers said the persons who were transferred from the Rose Hall Estate are being discriminated

against by the management of GuySuCo. According to the workers, they are not told where they have to work until they arrive each morning at the estate.

The workers also alleged that even if the work is not worth their labour, they are forced to work since the lorry driver refuses to take them back home.

The workers also claimed they have to travel long distances to get to work. In fact, some of them claim that on occasions, it is almost four hours after leaving home that they arrive at their work site.

They say they are being asked to fetch cane from further distances while the machine works the close cane

to load punts.

The hardship, the workers said, had resulted in their earnings being reduced by more than 60 per cent.

Only last week workers who were transferred from the said Rose Hall Estate to

the Blairmont Estate downed tools in protest, sighting discrimination and unfair treatment.

The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) has since met with the workers.

16

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

PPP steps up grassroots outreach with series of ‘bottom-house’ meetings A

series of ‘bottom-house’ meetings kicked off this week in a move by the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) to accelerate its outreach at the grassroots level.

On the East Coast of Demerara meetings were held at: Haslington, Hope Estate, Enmore North, Enmore Logwood, Success, Better Hope, Industry, Unity, Cove and John, Mon Repos, Annandale, Lusignan and Foulis.

On the East Bank of Demerara meetings were held at: Timehri, Kaneville, Diamond New School and Eccles.

Several other meetings were held in other Regions, while more engagements are scheduled to be held in the coming weeks.

17

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

‘Significant progress made under successive PPP/C administrations to improve welfare of Amerindians’ LEGISLATION

The Amerindian Act 2006 is an embodiment of policies that cover the protection of the general welfare and rights of Indigenous Peoples. It affirms the declaration of rights of indigenous peoples in specific stipulations that include governance, land rights and preservation, and Amerindian heritage.

Passed a year before the UN-DRIP declaration, Guyana’s 2006 Amerindian Act includes key provisions relating to Amerindian people that are not dissimilar, in most instances, from those outlined in the declaration, and has thus been the legal stronghold for Amerindian development.

TOURISM SUPPORT

In 2012, the Ministry financed eco-tourism projects for 19 Villages, each receiving utmost $1.5M. In 2013, twenty villages will be receiving grants at $1.5M each to the eco-tourism industry in their respective regions.

The initial implementation of the first 27 Community Development Plans (CDPs) funded through the GRIF, 11 % account for projects that are related to ecotourism.

HEALTH

The Amerindian Hostel data on inpatients reflect access to medical services at Georgetown Public Hospital thereby reducing further aggravation of health situations of Hinterland patients and providing better access to quality health services; safe and adequate accommodation for patients and welfare cases help ensure the psychological health and general well-being of those that are affected by sickness and other social issues.

The fact that all villages have a health hut/health centre makes access to primary health care easier in villages and thus improving health conditions of villagers.

Amerindian Residence accommodated a total of 7017 patients with their accompanying relatives up to 2014.

The Residence provides a shelter for those patients who have been referred to the Georgetown Public Hospital Corporation (GPHC) for medical attention.

Over the years, the purpose of this facility had evolved such that the most significant proportion of persons being accommodated is patients and those accompanying them.

The Residence has also expanded its services to encompass persons in difficult situations including Domestic Violence, Trafficking in Persons, labour issues, discharged prisoners or any other similar situation.

The Maternity waiting room at the Amerindian Hostel was constructed at a cost of $1.2M. The aim of the new facility is in keeping with Government’s commitment to ensure the safety of mothers and their babies and to ensure that every mother and child have access to adequate health care and provided with the best care and treatment.

SOLAR PANEL AND ENERGY ACCESS

A total of 11, 000 solar panels were installed across all the regions. A mini-hydro power plant is about to be constructed in Cheung Mouth River to supply renewable energy to Region 8 villages.

An additional 6000 solar panels are being procured for distribution to additional communities including some riverine communities CORE HOMES/HOME SUBSIDIES

A sum of $107.2M was spent on home improvement and 127 Core home were completed in the hinterlands

GOVERNANCE

Every year since the passing of the Amerindian Act, MoAA hosted the Annual National Toshaos Council Meeting (with an average budget of $50 M) to build capacity on: • Best practices in governance that includes transparency and accountability (audits); • Improved leadership for Toshaos and Village Councils in accordance to the Amerindian Act 2006; • Improved Community Management geared towards a holistic approach in Community Development; • Promoting dialog with government officials for the advancement of Amerindian welfare and total development of Amerindian villages; • Providing an opportunity for All Amerindian elected leaders to be able to have dialogue and exchanges on development priorities which challenges them; and • To provide a platform for the Amerindian Leaders have direct access to Government Ministers to dialogue on development challenges in various sectors and finding solutions ADF-GRIF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANS

A total of 187 Amerindian Villages and Communities were considered for economic projects under the Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS) - Guyana REDD+Investment Fund (GRIF).

Some US$6.3M from GRIF is allotted for said projects under the Amerindian Development Fund (ADF).

Twenty- Seven (27) projects from across all regions have been chosen for the initial implementation of the project which has commenced early part of 2013 with a budget of US$1.8M. Sixty-seven percent (67%) of all the projects are in agriculture with the aim of securing Amerindian livelihoods.

ADF Project Management Unit were up and running to facilitate full implementation of 160 CDPs. CULTURE

The preservation and promotion of Amerindian heritage is germane to Amerindian’s identity. The cultural activities have been the media for Amerindian culture to be accepted and understood by other groups in Guyana, at the same time, an avenue for all Amerindians to celebrate their heritage and embrace their indigenous roots and identity.

By continuing to protect Amerindian culture, Amerindians are able to understand the significance of their dances, languages, practices, local knowledge, cuisine, crafts, songs, and literature to the total development of their villages. The government is cognizant of the fact that culture is one of the pillars of sustainable development, and without it, and then development is not fully achieved.

Some $25M was spent on average annually in for Amerindian Heritage Celebrations to promote traditions, values, literature , dances of Amerindians. Another $6M was spent annually for other cultural activities The Initiatives include: Arawak Revival Language Project launched in Capoey; Support to Cultural Expo (North Pakaraimas) - $5M; and Support to cultural groups of Aisalton ($1.4M) and Santa Rosa ($7M) OTHER INVESTMENTS

• Mining including gold, diamond, various metals, bauxite • Forestry • Agriculture • Information Communication and Technology- 99 hubs were completed by 2014 to accommodate the computers 20 in number to commence the computer literacy training of youths, women and residents including children.

LAND OWNERSHIP

Prior to 1992, 74 communities were titled. Since, then 24 more villages were granted titles, thereby bringing the total of titled villages to 98, seventy-seven of which had been demarcated.

Six (6) titles were to be approved prior to May 2015 and seven (7) extension were investigated and in preparation for approval While Indigenous people in many Countries have right of use of the Land only, in Guyana where the Indigenous People account for approximately 9.7% of the population, Amerindians own land, including the forests resources within their Titled Lands.

YOUTH DEVELOPMENT/SUPPORT

The MoAA has launched the Youth Apprenticeship Programme (YEAP) aimed to train young Amerindians while employing them at the same time and become powerful partners in development.

Some $200M was spent on YEAP in 2013. Focus was placed on developing 2,000 Community Support Officers (CSOs) participate productively in Education, Health, and Social Welfare, Community Development, Culture, ICT, Infrastructure and small business.

The CSOs received training in various areas, including: • Management of Photovoltaic System • Management of Basic ICT hardware • Governance & Amerindian Act • Youth Voices for Climate Change (Sponsored by the US Embassy/Caribbean Development Bank educate youths on the importance of Climate Change and its impact in the Caribbean) • Business & Sustainable Development • Various aspect of the Community Development Project training The Youth Apprenticeship Programme was aimed at training young Amerindians while employing them at the same time is a medium to empower the young as partners in national development. These youths will be our partners in the implementation of CDPs and other socio-economic activities that are taking place in the villages now. The inclusion of the young in gearing their villages towards progress by letting them participate productively in technical, mechanical, computer, and agricultural activities will definitely enhance the capacity of the villages’ human resources.

AGRICULTURAL SUPPORT

Tractors, farm implements, fertilizers, acoushi ant bait, irrigation systems, and other infrastructures provided for villages every year An average of $50M per year was given in agricultural support for various villages through the years COMMUNICATION

Computer Accessibility through 100 computer hubs commenced in 2013. Some $287.7M was allotted for solar systems for ICT hubs; and 57,000 person-beneficiaries.

As at 2014: 72 of these hubs are completed;9 hubs near completion and the HUBs were constructed into Regions of 1, 7, 8 and 9.

All villages now have radio sets for fast communication, each one costs $500,000 Telecommunication facilities built in Mabaruma, Port Kaituma, Red Hill, Morucca, Aishalton, Annai, Lethem, Ominaik, and Mahdia, thus improving communication in the hinterlands!

18

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

Business community continues to feel pressure of political uncertainty – local economist T

he current political uncertainty within Guyana

will continue to stagnate the economy, according to econ-

omist, Peter Ramsaroop.

He charged that with the

passage of the no-confidence motion, rather than com-

ply with the constitutionally mandated consequences – a move to General and Regional Elections – the court challenges have heightened the atmosphere of uncertainly.

After the successful passage of the no-confidence motion in the National Assembly on December 21, 2018, both Granger and Prime Minister, Moses Nagamootoo, accepted that the Coalition Government had fallen and General and Regional Elections would have to be held in three months.

However, in less than two weeks, that initial acceptance of the consequences of the no-confidence motion vote morphed into three court challenges at the level of the High Court. Following the High Court ruling – which upheld the validity of the vote on the no-confidence motion – on January 31, 2019. The Appeal Court on March 21, 2019 – the day after General and Regional Elections were due (March 21, 2019) – set aside the High Court ruling.

The matter is now before the Caribbean Court of Justice.

Ramsaroop said, “This uncertainty is affecting (the)

increase in working capital for both local and foreign investments. The loss of thousands of jobs over the last four years have impacted many local businesses as disposable income needed for certain sectors were greatly affected.

“Our economics is just not about oil, but major transformative industries changes as proposed by the PPP/C (People’s Progressive Party/ Civic).

“The leading private sector (organization) has said two out of three business are being affected by the political uncertainty….I strongly believe the citizens are feeling the pressure as businesses hold off on future investment and the burdensome policies of Government take a toll.”

Notably, only last week, three of Guyana’s main representative private sector groups – the Georgetown Chamber of Commerce and Industry (GCCI), the Central Corentyne Chamber of Commerce and the Private Sector Commission (PSC) – decried the impact of the current state of affairs on the business community.

Hundreds more lose jobs as airline closes operations in Guyana

F

ly Jamaica Airways yesterday issued all its staffers with redundancy letters to Guyanese employees.

The letter issued, informed staff that their employment is valid until March 31, 2019.

The company’s management disclosed that the company has no other alternative at this time and the Board of Directors has agreed to let staff go. “The Board of Directors of Fly Jamaica Airways regrets to inform you that due to our lack of aircraft

and the impact it has had on the company’s financial position, we have no alternative but to make all of our employees redundant from March 31,” the letter stated.

The letter added that “for the time being no other resources or option exists” for the company.

Employees were informed that they will be compensated for November 2018 to March 2019.

It has been reported that the Jamaica-based airline employs some 400 persons.

19

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

Guyana Chronicle claims fraudulent citizenship notices were published twice because second one was correction ‒ review of full page advertisements exposes this as false

W

henever a national newspaper publishes something inaccurately, a second publication with the correct information is accompanied by a clear notation that it is a CORRECTION.

This, however, was not the case with the Guyana Chronicle’s publication of fraudulent citizenship notices.

A day after Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo,

raised the issue, Guyana Chronicle quoted Donna Todd, General Manager of the Guyana National Newspapers Limited (GNNL), as saying: “A mix-up in the computer system at the Ad-

vertising Department of the Guyana Chronicle was responsible for the incorrect names and photographs of persons seeking naturalisation status here being published recently. “…although Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo has indicated that the party was

researching the issue, the group failed to notice the corrected copies of the persons seeking naturalisation status were published following the mistakes.”

While Todd claims that the “corrected copies of the persons seeking naturalisation status were published

following the mistakes” there was no such publication to indicate a correction.

The examples of the fraudulent notices referred to by the Opposition Leader at his Wednesday (April 3, 2019) news conference, according to him represented the “tip of the iceberg” only.

On February 5, 2019, an advertisement in the Guyana Chronicle, indicated that a person named Gabriel St. Juste of Burma Mahaicony, Lot 65 East Coast Demerara applied to Minister of Citizenship, Winston Felix, for Guyanese citizenship

On February 7, 2019, another advertisement was published by the Guyana Chronicle with the same photograph, but a different name and address - Daniel Garcia Farres of 10-10 Norton Street, Cemetery Road, Georgetown, also applying for citizenship. There was no indication that this was a correction of the February 5, 2019 publication.

The Guyana Chronicle on March 27, 2019, published an advertisement where a person named Rubesh Abdus of Tabatinga, Lethem Region 9, applied for citizenship.

On March 29, 2019, another advertisement with the same photograph had a different name and address – this time, Hajime Beltran Abreu of Lot 39 Owen Street, Kitty, Georgetown. There was no indication that this was a correction of the March 27, 2019 publication.

20

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

City Hall in Focus Forensic audit comes three years after PPP/C repeated calls for transparency and accountability at City Hall

By Bishram Kuppen

I

t was recently announced at the Council that a forensic audit by the Auditor General had commenced on March 18, 2019. The People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C), via its City Hall Councillors, mounted pressure for a forensic audit, more than two years ago. It is now a reality. But we will be cautious at this point since the scope or terms of reference of the forensic audit was not disclosed.

The PPP/C won two seats at the local government elections in 2016 for the Georgetown City Council. Even with only two Councillors out of 30 on the Council, we have been at the forefront of exposing corruption at City Hall and pushing for accountability, transparency and good management of the Council’s resources so that citizens could benefit from services which the Council is mandated to provide but which they have failed miserably at providing. The PPP/C had mandated that our Councillors ensure that core services were performed by the Council and that no additional burdens should be placed on residents and that we should advocate for accountability, transparency and good governance.

Citizens are aware that the Georgetown City Council has been under the control of basically one group since our country’s independence in 1966. Over the decades, Georgetown became known as the garbage city due to the failure of the Council to remove garbage from all across the municipality even though it was their direct responsibility. In addition, the core services that were supposed to be performed were not done or were approached in a haphazard and unprofessional manner. Numerous complaints were made, which were also published in local newspapers through the letter columns, but nothing changed at City Hall. There is a general belief that bribery and kickbacks are a requirement if you wanted anything from City Hall whether it was for permits, getting a violation remedied, getting contracts or applying for spaces to vend.

After the 2016 Local Government Elections, and even before I was sworn in as a Councilor, I made a public call for a forensic

audit to be conducted at City Hall due to what I described as years of allegations of corruption, mismanagement, financial malfeasance and lack of services which were reported widely in the press. The APNU+AFC Mayor Chase-Green at that time had immediately attacked me and said that I was not even in the Council, but I was already calling for an audit. I viewed a forensic audit as a starting point for the new Council to understand the weaknesses and loopholes existing and to come up with ways to better manage the City Council, among other things. I also viewed it in light of the APNU+AFC government’s drive to commence forensic audits on a number of Ministries and reasoned that City Hall should be at the top of the list for any forensic audit in the country due to decades of allegations of corruption and mismanagement.

After my initial call for a forensic audit, the subsequent sequence of revelations and exposures which occurred served to further justify my insistence that a robust forensic audit was absolutely necessary to move the Georgetown City Council forward.

As a PPP/C Councillor, I found it also very challenging to get the Mayor, Town Clerk and the rest of Councillors to understand that our mandate and responsibilities should transcend the political sphere to a large measure, especially when it came to looking out for the best interests of our residents and stakeholders. The City Council’s administration headed by the Town Clerk was and still is staffed by a majority of old-timers from the PNC who are very resistant to change where accountability, transparency and good governance are concerned. So my call for a forensic audit was treated with scorn and derision as if I was accusing pious people of improprieties. In following through, I had submitted motions on three occasions calling for a forensic audit but they were rejected. I had also submitted a request for a statement of the Council’s financial position but never received any report. My frequent calls for a forensic audit and the back and forth with the Town Clerk and Mayor was covered widely in the newspapers.

Soon after I had called for a forensic audit in April 2016, I also raised questions when reference was made in a document to the continuation of signing arrangements for a parking meter contract. As I recall, I was the only Councillor who asked questions about the parking meter contract at that meeting which could have gone unnoticed and probably fully implemented. I had requested to see a copy of the contract but they did not want to release the contract. When they finally allowed me to view the contract under the condition that it cannot be copied, I made copious notes under the watchful eye of a security guard in Town Clerk Royston King’s office. I was shocked at the ridiculous and unequal terms of the contract which were entirely in favour of the contractor and the Council would only be receiving a pittance in addition to bearing culpability for default in a one-sided manner. The People’s Progressive Party then hosted a public forum in September 2016 to

expose corruption at City Hall including the parking meter contract where I spoke on the ridiculous terms of the contract and that is was illegally signed. At the forum, we also discussed vendors’ issues, new container fees, accountability and awarding of contracts which were also of major concern to residents and stakeholders.

In addition to the PPP/C Councillors, residents, a few other Councillors and members of civil society were also outraged by the terms of the contract in as more details became known. Subsequently, a civil movement which included members from a wide cross-section of society, inclusive of People’s Progressive Party members, was borne out of that outrage which eventually led to the suspension of the parking meter contract implementation. Town Clerk Royston King, Mayor Chase Green and Finance Chairman Oscar Clarke were trying to foist an illegal and one-sided contract on the citizens of Georgetown in favour of SCS. This contract did not come about in a legal manner nor were consultations done with residents or feasibility studies and it must be investigated.

When it was announced by Mayor ChaseGreen in May 2017 ((Guyana Chronicle dated May 23, 2017) that the Auditor General was conducting an audit of the Council and that PPP Councillor Kuppen should be happy and cheering because his calls for an audit were now being heeded, I responded that I will await the outcome of the audit before commenting. That audit was not a forensic audit; it was simply the routine audit which is required every year.

Citizens would recall the efforts of Town Clerk Royston King and others to build luxury homes for themselves in an upscale neighborhood which I, along with other citizens had opposed and exposed. This was just another example of the corrupt mindset that existed in the Council where some of these PNC-aligned officers and Councillors pursued a policy of personal aggrandizement in spite of the glaring financial difficulties that the Council was experiencing including the inability to pay employees and other creditors. It is unclear if any houses were constructed in other areas so further investigation is necessary even though there were public references made to such in 2018.

When I discovered that the Council was paying $6 million per month for a road sweeper, I called for an immediate suspension of the service in June of 2016. This was another sweetheart contract which did not make sense especially since the Council was in a financial crisis and use of a road sweeper on busy Georgetown streets would be a waste of money. These sweepers are most effective if the shoulders of the roads are clear of vehicles which is where most of the debris from the road accumulates but most streets in Georgetown are occupied on both sides by vehicles especially in the busy commercial district so the road sweeper would not have access to these areas. In any event, after I kept calling for an end to this waste of Council money, they were forced to cancel the

service. This is just another example of the waste of Council’s money and how contracts are doled out without any feasibility studies.

We were only recently notified by the Ministry of Communities that there are a large number of contracts with contractors which will be reviewed by the Works Committee but I should add that none of these contracts were ever brought to the full council for approval nor were they publicly tendered which certainly calls for further investigation.

Then there came my exposure of the situation where the City Council deducted money from employees’ salaries for contributions to the National Insurance Scheme, Guyana Revenue Authority and the Credit Union but which the Council never remitted to those agencies for years. Employees took protest action against the City Council and to this date all the contributions have not been brought up to date. These were illegal actions which should have attracted criminal prosecutions but nothing was done. A forensic audit could discover the extent of these illegal actions whether the Council was truthful in the amount which is owed and what payments were made to those agencies.

The Kitty Market rehabilitation has dragged on for years and I along with PPP Executive Member, Gail Teixeira, and other citizens had visited Kitty Market in the initial stages of the rehabilitation and we exposed and reported on the sub-standard work being done. It was recently reported that the City Council spent $92 million so far and the Ministry of Communities spent an additional $24 million but the Kitty Market is still not completed. In the meantime, the stallholders of Kitty market continue to suffer and residents of the Kitty area are deprived of the use their market. To make matters worse, the City Council has increased the rents to an unconscionable $14,000 minimum per stall when stallholders used to pay under $2,000 per stall. I had strenuously objected to this increase on the grounds that the Stallholders could not afford to pay that much but the APNU Councillors were steadfast in their demand that the stallholders must pay. It is important to note that the construction work on the Kitty Market is being done by the Council’s Engineers Department and many independent contractors are alarmed at the large amount of money spent ($116 million) so far but the market is not completed. I along with many residents and stallholders are questioning the amount spent on this project since it does not appear that $116 million worth of work was completed on the market.

The Council spends hundreds of millions of dollars to maintain the La Repentir cemetery but they have never publicly tendered the projects and only certain favourite contractors are hired to do the work. In fact, the Council’s administration would usually wait until the situation got to the point where it could be deemed an emergency with the sole purpose of bypassing the tender requirement which states that all contracts over $250,000 must be publicly tendered except in cases where there (Turn to page 21)

21

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

Forensic audit comes three years after PPP/C... is an emergency. I have spoken and written about this situation but nothing was ever done and no financial report has ever been provided for works done in the cemetery and the associated costs which warrants further investigation.

The dysfunctional state of the City Treasurer’s department even frustrated the efforts of the Auditor General of Guyana to complete his annual audits of the Council’s books. A general disregard for accounting and accountability procedures was the norm for this department which included missing or no documents and unapproved spending. Special audits by the Auditor General had to be performed for the $300 million given to the Council for the Jubilee cleanup in 2015 where they have not been able to account for all of the money that was spent. In addition, the

Auditor General was also involved in another audit of the $200 million given to the Council in 2016 for Georgetown Restoration Program where contracts and supporting documents were not presented to account for all of the money. Billions of dollars are owed to service providers and contractors and there has never been any clear or accurate certified financial statements reflecting revenue, expenses and liabilities of the Council.

The Commission of Inquiry which was authorized by the Local Government Commission in 2018 found numerous cases of illegalities at City Council and had recommended calling in the Guyana Police Force to initiate further investigations and also for a forensic audit to be conducted. It is important to note that many of the issues which I had exposed in the public were the

subject of investigation by the Commission of Inquiry in addition to a list of violations and illegalities contained in a 20-page document that the PPP/C submitted to the Commission of Inquiry.

While I did not list all of the issues related to corruption and mismanagement, from the foregoing alone it is clear that we were justified in calling for a forensic audit of the Georgetown City Council. The People’s Progressive Party wishes to state that we expect the Local Government Commission to implement all of the other recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry as soon as possible.

We also hope that all findings will be acted upon in a timely manner when the Auditor general completes the forensic audit.

In concluding, I must say that in the 50 years that the PNC (and its various mutations)

(From page 20)

controlled Georgetown, there have been no significant improvements or transformational changes that would be expected of a Capital City such as Georgetown. It was as if time stood still in relation to developmental, maintenance, infrastructural works and an expansion of the range of services provided to residents. So residents and stakeholders are justified in their disgust and outrage at the state of affairs at City Hall which is continuing today even with the newly elected council sworn in on January 2019.

The bottom line is that drains are still clogged, billions are still owed to creditors, workers and contractors are not paid on time while there is still chaos in the streets and car/ bus parks, many reports of crime being committed and core services are still not being performed in all areas.

Granger in Cuba to start Positions from Freedom House this week radiotherapy (A look at the latest statements made by the People’s Progressive Party)

Coalition’s talk of resignations a ‘ploy developed with the distant hope that it will strengthen their appeal at the CCJ’ T

he Coalition Government is missing. The country is adrift in the absence of President David Granger and Coalition Government ministers who have busied themselves with planning campaign events and collecting perks.

Crucial policy making to tackle major issues affecting our people is non-existent.

All the while, Guyanese are losing jobs, welfare and are facing increased hardships.

In the face of all of this, a terse April 2, 2019 statement from the Ministry of the Presidency announced that that President David Granger “received and accepted the resignation of all Coalition Members of Parliament who are holders of dual citizenship” - a cryptic announcement that was not accompanied by clarity to several significant questions.

We are now in a deepened state of uncertainty.

At the top of the list of unanswered questions is, who will take charge of the key Ministries headed by the Coalition Members of Parliament who have resigned, specifically the Ministry of Foreign Affairs? Other

questions include: Who are all the Coalition Members of Parliament holding dual citizenship? Why were they not named? Are there more than four Coalition Members of Parliament with dual citizenship?

The People’s Progressive Party (PPP) is of the view the APNU+AFC Coalition Government changed direction after we pointed out the duplicity of the Coalition Government of arguing in the courts that the vote of former Parliamentarian, Charandass Persaud, should be invalidated for the no-confidence motion and arrogantly insisting that all Government Parliamentarians, including those holding dual citizenship, will be present for the anticipated sitting of the National Assembly on April 11, 2019, where they will continue to vote – votes that the Coalition would no doubt count as valid.

The PPP believes that the Coalition Government’s change in position is a ploy developed with the distant hope that it will strengthen their appeal at the CCJ. The Chief Justice (ag), Rox-

anne George-Wiltshire, was clear that ineligibility to sit as a Parliamentarian and invalidating the vote of a Parliamentarian who was ineligible to sit in the National Assembly are two separate things. Further, the Chief Justice (ag) was also clear that Article 165 (2) of the Constitution protects Persaud’s vote. Article 165 (2) states that: “The Assembly may act notwithstanding any vacancy in its membership (including any vacancy not filled when the Assembly first meets after the commencement of this Constitution or after any dissolution of Parliament) and the presence or participation of any person not entitled to participate in the proceedings of the Assembly shall not invalidate those proceedings.”

In the meantime, with the acceptance of the resignation of all Coalition Members of Parliament who are holders of dual citizenship, the PPP expresses the hope that that the sinecure positions will not, now, be created for the Coalition Members of Parliament who have resigned.

P

resident David Granger and First Lady, Mrs Sandra Granger, on Tuesday (April 2, 2019), departed Guyana for the Republic of Cuba, where he will commence radiotherapy. This is his eight visit to Cuba, as he continues his cancer treatment.

In May 2018, President David Granger visited Trinidad and Tobago for an annual medical checkup, after which it was claimed that he was given a clean bill of health. Granger was back in Trinidad and Tobago, a few months later. Granger, according to the Ministry of the Presidency, started to experience certain symptoms which were persistent – hence his decision to re-

turn to Trinidad to revisit the tests that were done in May 2018.

Little information was released on the status of the President’s health, prior the November 14, 2018 confirmation that he was diagnosed with cancer, Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma.

The President returned to Guyana from the Republic of Cuba on November 20, 2018 after spending approximately three weeks there, where his medical team performed a number of medical interventions, including the first round of chemotherapy treatment.

Granger’s second round of treatment was done after he left Guyana on Tuesday (December 4, 2018). The

President’s third round of chemo was done after he left Guyana on Christmas Day (December 25, 2018).

His fourth round of chemo was done after he left Guyana on January 15, 2019.

His fifth round of chemo was done after he left Guyana on February 5, 2019.

For his sixth visit, Granger left Guyana on February 26, 2019. After his seventh visit, when he did a last round of chemotherapy, the President returned to Guyana on March 23, 2019.

Cuba’s Centro de Investigaciones Médico Quirúrgicas (CIMEQ), according to the Ministry of the Presidency, has drafted a schedule of treatment which will run until May 2019.

22

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

Holding the APNU+AFC Coalition to account – a review of local happenings

APNU+AFC trapped in the tangled web they weaved

By Dr. Leslie Ramsammy

T

here is no need for any MP to resign, they were formally resigned since January 31st when the Chief Justice ruled dual citizens sitting in Parliament is unconstitutional and, henceforth, could not legally continue as MPs. Given the ruling, the Speaker would not have been able to recognize any dual citizen sitting in Parliament. At the time, we knew, at least, four APNU+AFC MPs and senior Ministers and, at least, three PPP MPs, including its Whip, were dual citizens.

They ceased to be MPs from the day of the ruling. At any sitting after that, the Speaker would have been obliged not to recognize them as legally present in the National Assembly.

Whether any of these seven or additional ones who had not declared their dual citizen status had formally, in writing, resigned their parliamentary seats is irrelevant. This was no voluntary, routine resignation. Their immediate resignation as of January 31st was automatic, forced by the law. The insistence by APNU+AFC and David Granger that certain constitutional procedures must follow only applies to

a voluntary resignation.

The egregious acts that followed the January 31st rulings by the Chief Justice, therefore, were the continued brazen, illegal occupation of the Ministerial positions, the insistence they will not resign and the announcement that all APNU+AFC dual citizens would attend the National Assembly on April 11, the date APNU+AFC vulgarly set as the day for resumption of parliament.

Now we have the comedy of the President insisting he has received the resignation of the Ministers, but he has to await the resignation in writing to the Speaker.

Resignation letters to the President or Leader of the Opposition are definitely not necessary. The necessary next step now is for the Head of the Candidate Lists to inform the Speaker that seats in Parliament occupied by those seven (four APNU+AFC and three PPP) and, maybe others since there exists information that two others in APNU+AFC are dual citizens, are now vacant and that replacement candidates would be named. Lacking this action, the Speaker is obligated to declare those seats vacant based on the judicial rulings, whether the heads

of the candidate lists inform him or not. The Speaker has been informed by the court.

The initial, prolonged insistence from APNU+AFC none of their dual citizens will resign as MPs and as Ministers was egregious and contempt of court. Their excuse that the matter is under appeal was torched the day they insisted that the Court of Appeal ruling on the NCM provided them with the legitimacy to continue in government with business as usual, even though they knew that the NCM ruling was appealed at the CCJ. They finally acceded to the court's ruling only because they could not survive the public shaming and condemnation of their hypocrisy - using an appeal to delay compliance with the court ruling on dual citi-

zens, but proceeding with the split-decision, controversial, shocking NCM ruling, while ignoring that the NCM ruling was appealed.

Outside of succumbing to the public shaming, condemnation and pressure from the PPP and the public, APNU+AFC, having shamelessly set a date for a parliamentary sitting on April 11 must have been informed by the Speaker that he was obligated to disavow the presence of all dual citizens in Parliament and rule their presence illegal and a contempt of court. The truth is that they did not need to resign, but to inform the Speaker they will not return to Parliament as they had announced previously.

The unrelenting shaming from all corners of the society and from international stakeholders have forced APNU+AFC in a corner, hiding and hanging their heads in shame. Yet, we do not know the full truth. While we know that Joe Harmon, an American citizen, Rupert Roopnarine, Carl Greenidge and Dominic Gaskin, British citizens, were forced and shamed into accepting they

were resigned, since they could not hide their dual citizenship status, we really do not know if those are the only ones from APNU+AFC who are dual citizens. Information has surfaced that, at least, Volda Lawrence and Winston Jordon are other APNU+AFC MPs who are dual citizens. It is a measure of the abyss of shame that APNU+AFC has operated under since May 2015 that they cannot unequivocally tell the nation if there are other dual citizens APNU+AFC MPs in parliament.

It is dereliction of duty for the government resisting demands to state categorically and unequivocally they have no other dual citizens as MPs and Ministers. Stop playing games and make a definitive statement now.

APNU+AFC and their defenders have tried in vain to excuse their shameless behavior by arguing the PPP also has dual citizen MPs. But the PPP since January 31st, after the ruling of the Chief Justice, unequivocally declared no dual citizen PPP MP will ever sit in Parliament again. The PPP has gone further stating that any

future PPP list of candidates for election will not include any dual citizen. Two PPP dual citizen MPs in the present Parliament have stated unequivocally they will renounce their citizenship of other countries and Bharat Jagdeo had already stated that no PPP dual citizen will sit in Parliament. There have never been any equivocation on this matter.

In desperation to find something, anything, to invalidate the December 21st No-Confidence Motion (NCM), APNU+AFC challenged Charandass's vote on the basis that he was a dual citizen. APNU+AFC allowed themselves to become ensnarled in the web of deceit that Basil Williams convinced them is their only future. They knew MPs on both sides were dual citizens and should their dual citizenship challenge succeed, APNU+AFC would be decimated - they had more to lose than the PPP. In their desperation for a straw to grab on to, they permitted Williams to take them into a freefall.

They have been caught in the tangled web they stupidly weaved.

Guyanese interested in volunteering asked to contact Party

T

he People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) is now available on WhatsApp number 592-611-PPPC (7772) and it encouraging Guyanese, who are interested in political activism and volunteering, to contact the Party.

WhatsApp allows persons to message from Guyana other countries at no cost.

Operators are manning the line on a 24-hour basis and interested Guyanese are asked to communicate this to the Party.

23

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

APNU+AFC gov’t silent on reports that Lawrence, Jordan are also dual citizens

The Coalition Government Parliamentarians reported to have dual citizenship

W

hile the APNU+AFC Coalition Government insists that only four of their Members of Parliament hold dual citizenship, information reaching the Mirror Newspaper, confirmed by multiple reliable sources, indicate that this is not true.

Chairperson of the Peo-

ple’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) and Minister of Health Volda Lawrence, as well as Minister of Finance, Winston Jordan, are reportedly also dual citizens.

Lawrence reportedly holds a United States of America (USA) passport, while Jordan holds a Jamai-

can one.

The four other persons holding dual citizenship, as confirmed by the Coalition Government, are: Minister of Foreign Affairs, Carl Greenidge; Minister of State, Joseph Harmon; Minister of Public Service, Dr. Rupert Roopnarine; and Minister of Business,

Dominic Gaskin.

The Coalition Government has remained silent on the news, also reported in other sections of the media, that Lawrence and Jordan hold dual citizenship as well.

Notably, in line with the ruling of the Appeal Court on March 22, 2019 – a rul-

ing that upheld the decision of the High Court handed down on January 31, 2019 – persons who hold dual citizen cannot sit as Parliamentarians, therefore they would have to resign.

According to Article 183 (2) (a): “The office of any Minister shall become vacant if the holder

of the office ceases to be a member of the (National) Assembly for any cause other than a dissolution of Parliament.”

Therefore, once a Parliamentarian resigns, they can no longer hold a ministerial post. [SEE PAGE 10 FOR ADDITIONAL REPORTING]

April 11th sitting of National No confirmation from Parliament Assembly cancelled Despite promise…

aving named April 11, Office that Gov’t MPs with dual H 2019 as the date for the next sitting of the National citizenship submitted resignations Assembly, the APNU+AFC

‒ AFC considering fraud accused as replacement for Gaskin

U

p to Thursday (April 4, 2019) afternoon, there was no confirmation from the Parliament office that any of the Coalition Government Parliamentarians, who hold dual citizenship, have submitted letters of resignation.

On Tuesday (April 2, 2019) a statement from the Ministry of the Presidency said, “As of Monday, April 1, 2019, His Excellency David Granger, President of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana, has received and accepted the resignation of all coalition Members of Parliament who are holders of dual citizenship.”

However, on Wednesday (April 3, 2019) this position changed and the Government said the resignations have not yet taken effect.

A statement from the Ministry of the Presidency on Wednesday said, “President David Granger, this morning, stated that while he has accepted the resignation of the four-coalition government Members of Parliament, their resignations will not take effect immediately as there are several process-

es which have to be applied.

The Head of State made it clear that the replacement of Members of Parliament (MPs) can be done only when those MPs submit their letters of resignation to the Speaker of the National Assembly as is prescribed by the Constitution of Guyana.”

While, there has been no confirmation that the letters of resignation have been sent to the Speaker of the National Assembly, Dr Barton Scotland, reports are that the National Communications Network (NCN) Berbice Manager, Donna Mathoo, may be considered as a possible replacement for Business Minister Dominic Gaskin as a Member of Parliament (MP) for the Alliance For Change (AFC).

Gaskin is a dual citizen, holding a British passport.

However, Mathoo has been previously accused of financial fraud. AFC Leader, Raphael Trotman, on Wednesday, said, “There are a number of persons who are eligible, Ms Mathoo being one of them, and so there is active consideration

of appointing her.”

Mathoo was sent on administrative leave in 2017, and in March 2018, she was back on the job. The State-owned NCN has been silent on the outcome of an internal probe into the allegations.

Apart from Gaskin, three other Government MPs hold dual citizenship, namely: Minister of State, Joseph Harmon; Foreign Affairs Minister, Carl Greenidge; and Public Service Minister, Dr Rupert Roopnaraine.

On the end of the Parliamentary Opposition, resignation letters have been submitted to the Leader of the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) Lists of Candidates, Donald Ramotar,

by PPP/C Parliamentarians with dual citizenship – Gail Teixeira, Adrian Anamayah and Odinga Lumumba – in line with the ruling of the Appeal Court which stated that persons holding dual citizenship are ineligible to sit in the National Assembly.

The trio are expected to also send resignation letters to the Speaker of the House early in the new week.

Coalition Government has changed positions – on yet another issue.

In a televised statement on Wednesday, Leader of the House, Prime Minister, Moses Nagamootoo, said the National Assembly will now meet “later in the month” as against April 11, 2019.

Also, Government’s Chief Whip, Amna Ally, said, “We just find that the

11th (April) was not a convenient date, so we are going to have it on another date.”

Last Friday (March 29, 2019), Minister of State, Joseph Harmon, boldly declared that all Coalition Government Parliamentarians would return to the National Assembly on April 11, 2019 – despite the Appeal Court ruling that persons with dual citizenship cannot sit as Parliamentarians. Harmon had said, “It is contemplated that on April 11th, 2019 when the National Assembly sits,

that all the members of the Government side will be there….when you sit there, our Parliament at the present configuration, you represent close to 5000 persons so you cannot on your own get up one day and leave….I see nothing duplicitous about it.”

This latest change in position, according to political observers, is indicative that the Coalition Government has no plans to comply with the Appeal Court’s ruling, nor the Constitution of Guyana.

US calls for adherence to Constitution of Guyana W

ith concerns being continuously raised about the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) and its capacity to carry out credible elections, the United States of America (USA) State Department has reminded the country of the need for free and fair elections.

Deputy Spokesperson for the US Department of State, Robert Palladino, in a statement said, “The United States reiterates the importance of scheduling genuinely free and fair national elections in the Co-Operative Republic

of Guyana in adherence with the Guyanese constitution and Guyanese law. The U.S. government values Guyana as a friend and partner and stands ready to assist as needed.”

Since the December 21, 2018, passage of the mo-

tion of no-confidence against the APNU+AFC Coalition Government, calls have been made by various stakeholders including foreign diplomats here for the Guyana Government to abide by the Constitution.

24

Major drug bust at Lethem

S

ome 101lbs of com pressed cannabis and 21lbs of cocaine were seized following an operation at Tabatinga, Lethem in Region Nine.

Police in ‘F’ Division, acting on information received, went to a location on Wednesday (April 3, 2019) at about 19:30 hour,

Woman wanted for 2009 murder T he Police have issued a wanted bulletin for Milaimi Alli for questioning in relation to the murder of Ramzan Ali which was committed between July 11 and 12, 2009 at Coldingen, East Coast Demerara.

The last known addresses of the 50-year-old woman are Lot 29 Good Hope, East Coast Demerara; Gordon Street, Kitty George-

town and 107-15 110th Richmond Hill, Queens New York.

Anyone with information that may lead to the arrest Alli is asked to contact the police on telephone numbers 226-2407, 2252694, 229-2019, 229-2289, 227-1149, 911 or the nearest police station.

All information will be treated with confidence.

Raid at Mazaruni prison turns up contraband items where upon arrival, a male was seen running from an incomplete building.

A search unearthed the large quantity of drugs, all packaged in a total of 61 taped parcels.

Two persons have been arrested and are assisting with the investigation.

One of the suspects is

the owner of the property and the other person was arrested during a sting operation after he attempted to bribe the lawmen with a sum of cash, in order to have the drugs returned to him.

The police team that found the illicit substances was led by a Superintendent.

Woman busted with cocaine at CJIA

R

anks of the Police Narcotics Branch arrested a 24-year-old woman of West Coast Berbice with in excess of ten pounds of cocaine concealed in books at the Cheddi Jagan International Airport, Timehri on Monday (April 1, 2019).

The four books were reportedly in

her luggage. According to information received, the woman cut holes in the center of the books and stashed the cocaine inside. She then used glue to past the pages together.

She was destined for the United States of America.

Elderly woman murdered, set alight

T

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

he burnt body of an elderly woman was discovered on Sunday evening (March 31, 2019) in the backyard of her Hope Village, West Coast Berbice (WCB) home suspected to have been murdered and set alight.

The dead woman has been identified as Bhagwandai Deonarine.

She reportedly lived alone at the time of her demise.

Investigations are ongoing.

A

large quantity of prohibited items were unearthed during a six-hour search by ranks of the joint service on Monday (April 1, 2019) at the Mazaruni Prison.

Among the items were 23 nails, 22 bottles pepper sauce, six razor blades, eight lighters, two metal spoons, 14 improvised weapons, four pieces of wire, four bottles homemade wine, one nail clip, one transformer, one knife, four pieces of rope, one sim card, one USB, one tweezer, one glass, 13 improvised smoking utensils, one earpiece, one metal fork, 24 disposable blades and one carved out bible use to hide cellphone.

About two weeks ago, an early morning raid at the New Amsterdam Prison by members of the Guyana Police Force and the Guyana Prison Service had unearthed

several items such as cellphones, a Rambo knife, shaving set, improvised weapons,

phone chargers, metal spoons and a 27 razor blades among others.

High speed chase ends with arrest Son of businessman shot, robbed of duo with illegal weapons on Regent Street high-speed chase be- gave chase and after

T

he son of the owner of Pressy’s Enterprises was on Monday (April 1, 2019) shot and relieved of an undisclosed sum of money that he was carrying in a briefcase at Regent Street, Georgetown, by armed bandits.

The victim, Selson Prescott, was reportedly in the vicinity of Regent and King Streets at about 14:15 hours

when he was approached by the suspects. The men reportedly attempted to relieve him of the briefcase but he put up a resistance and it was at this time that he was shot in his groin.

After the shooting, the men grabbed the case and fled the scene on motorcycles.

At the time of the incident, the young man was reportedly heading to the bank to make a deposit.

The injured man was assisted by public-spirited citizens and taken to a private medical facility where he was admitted.

Investigations are ongoing.

A

tween Police and a car bearing a fake number plate led to the apprehension of two men, one of whom was armed with an unlicensed gun.

Reports are that around 13:00 hour on Monday (April 1, 2019) in the vicinity the Railway Embankment at Industry, East Coast Demerara, the Police, acting on information tactfully approached the motorcar.

The driver of the car upon realising that the ranks were approaching sped off the scene. However, the Police

a period of hot pursuit, the vehicle was intercepted.

One of the two males, who exited the car brandishing a handgun, quickly removed a pasted-on number plate from the vehicle and ran into an empty plot of land. He was found hiding in a clump of bushes. The driver was also detained.

The unlicensed pistol with nine live rounds he was trying to hide were retrieved.

Also, a mask was found nearby.

Investigations are ongoing.

25

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

Guyana Chronicle’s General Manager fired over financial irregularities The General Manager of the Guyana National Newspaper Limited (GNNL), on Wednesday (April 3, 2019) was fired over several breaches of financial regulations.

Duncan, who was the Alliance For Change (AFC) Councillor for the city of Georgetown and Deputy Mayor, served as General Manager of the company from June 1, 2018 to April 1, 2019.

The Board of Directors of GNNL in a statement said the decision to dismiss Duncan came after a five-hour long meeting at the company’s office where Duncan and his legal representative, Attorney James Bond were given the opportunity to provide an explanation in response to the findings of

the audit report, which was dated March 18, 2019, and answer questions posed by the Directors as to why he should not be disciplined in accordance with the recommendations of the report, which was presented by the Office of the Auditor General.

“All Directors agreed that numerous breaches identified in the report in all of the areas under review were of a serious nature and disciplinary action against the General Manager was necessary especially since he was on probation,” the statement said.

The GNNL Board comprises of a Chairman and six Directors; one of whom was absent at the time of voting and a workers’ representative without voting rights.

Duncan’s firing came after an audit report found that there were over 20 transactions conducted under Duncan’s watch or by Duncan himself, which were in blatant violation of financial regulations.

A special audit ordered by the Office of the Auditor General found numerous violations during the short three-month period under Duncan’s stewardship of the company.

Auditing firm Chateram Ramdihal Chartered Accountants conducted an audit of the State newspaper’s operations from June 1, 2018, to September 10, 2018.

The audit found that tender rules were violated, services were procured without contracts and approvals were given for payments without

the regular procedure of company stamp or signature.

Further, cash advances were given to Duncan to

travel overseas but he did not clear the amounts.

It was also found that the company’s personnel

policy and procedures manual were ignored during the recruitment, termination and dismissal of employees.

Guyana Chronicle has a Management Tender Committee, which approves transactions ranging from $100,000 to $300,000 before payments are made. But during the stipulated time examined, no approval was given for nine such transactions valued at $1.6 million.

Duncan took an overseas trip with the marketing coordinator for the resuscitation of the publication’s New York edition. This trip cost an excess of $736,028, but there was no approval for such an event and to date, no relevant documents were brought forward to support these expenditures, the audit found.

ERC report into GECOM’s...

A stable democracy must rest on a culture rooted

in the rule of law Dear Editor,

T

he rule of law, especially in new and fragile democracies, Guyana being a case on point should not be underestimated or taken for granted. It is law through rules and institutions that creates democracy and puts limit on a democratic majority government.

Thus, law cannot be understood in isolation from the rest of human culture, and this close relationship is especially significant in the ways that societies construct their fundamental legal order.

When we speak of democracy, we are referring to a set of rules and institutions that afford the people an opportunity to involve in their government through elections, referenda, legislatures, etc. These rules and institutions are themselves legal creations.

However, unless they are formalized in law, they are likely to be unstable, obscure, and inaccessible to the populace. The written constitution establishes these rules and institutions in a way that makes them difficult to change, and in time, these rules and institutions come to be regarded as integral to the experience of the country. In some cases, these rules and institutions are the product of statutes created by legislatures or regulations issued by executive or administrative agencies. Either way, the rules and institutions are constitutional in that they fundamentally establish the democratic order. In turn, this fundamental legal ordering creates democracy through shaping the structure and operation of government.

However, for a democracy to be successful, it must not merely revolve around

and focus on contests for power and control through elections. Instead, a stable democracy must rest on a culture rooted in the rule of law, which provides norms that limit the power of those who win elections. It should always be kept in mind that while winning allows those in power certain legally defined prerogatives, losing should not subject the minority faction(s) to the untrammeled will of those in government. Therefore, while the constitution creates some of these limits, even these depend on the cultural disposition of the citizens to follow the rules.

In closing, examples abound that democracy works best when the citizens broadly embrace a network of norms regarding the limits of political power. In other words, for democracy to work, citizens must generally support the constitutional regime even when they lose particular political battles. However, this can only happen when the populace, and more so, those entrusted with governing the sociopolitical and economic affairs, understand and respect the fundamental legal ordering that limits democracy through shared culture and the rule of law. To expect adherence from one group/faction when the other, in this case the government, flouts the rule of law is far-fetched in our emerging democracy.

Those who wield power must set the example. In essence, the most fundamental commitment of those in power should be to the law that both creates and limits democracies.

Yours faithfully, Ronald Singh

“The Chairman during the course of the ERC investigation, as you would find in the document, could not provide any grounds of why he cast his vote with the Government-nominated Commissioners to give Ms. Myers the job. It was clear. He never even met Mr. Persaud. His vote was prejudicial. He made judgement before all of the information was before him. He made judgment before he even met the gentleman. His vote was based on prejudice and that is a very serious matter.

How could the country rely on the Chairman to be fair on other matters, when on a simple matter like the employment of the second highest officer at the GECOM Secretariat, he acted based on prejudice?

“The GECOM’s Chairman’s description of Mr. Persaud as being ‘shifty’ can be considered as language from a particular era that is closely associated with viewing a particular race as being inferior. It is racism in coded language.

It can clearly be seen that the Chairman’s mindset, an elitist mindset, is what guides his decision on who he works with.”

ERC FINDINGS According to the report, on Page 29, Persaud was the most “suitable candidate for appointment to the post of DCEO” of GECOM. It adds that, “Nothing has

been presented to us which, at least on paper, reveals any attributes in Ms. Myers that were capable of offsetting the clear paper advantage which Mr, Persaud enjoyed.”

Notably, the ERC committee dealing with the investigation met with Persaud twice – on August 14, 2018 and on August 24, 2018 The ERC also met with the Opposition-nominated GECOM Commissioners on August 29, 2018.

The ERC is a constitutional body established under the Herdmanston Accord. It works with persons and agencies to promote harmonious ethnic relations. The Commission also deals with complaints, promotes training in racial harmony, and fosters a sense of security, among all ethnic groups.

CONTROVERSIAL APPOINTMENT In June 2018, the three Opposition-nominated GECOM Commissioners - Robeson Benn, Sase Gunraj and Bibi Shaddick – walked out of a meeting after GECOM Chairman, Justice (rtd) James Patterson, exercised his casting vote to support the PNCR-nominated Commissioners’ rejection of the top ranked candidate, Persaud. As a result of his casting vote, the way has been paved for the second-ranked candidate, Roxanne Myers, to be

(From back page)

offered the post of DCEO. Myers has no election management experience.

She has been linked to PNRC-nominated Commissioner, Vincent Alexander, since at one point she was a student of his.

She has also exposed herself as an avid supporter of the APNU+AFC Coalition government, given her social media posts. As such, critics have said that Myers’ ability to function in an impartial manner is in question.

Notably, Persaud was not only the top-ranked candidate for the post of DCEO, but he served as DCEO for several years too. He was appointed as DCEO at GECOM on August 12, 2014. In 2014, when Persaud was appointed, PNCR-nominated Commissioner, Vincent Alexander, made no objection, when there was a vote on whether or not he should be appointed to the post. Persaud was forced to re-apply for the job he held because his contract ended and could not be renewed, given that there was no functioning Commission at the time – given the delay in appointing a new GECOM Chairman.

The Commission had dissolved after the resignation of former GECOM Chairman, Dr Steve Surujbally.

Before being appointed as DCEO in 2014, Persaud was at GECOM since 2001.

26

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

OBSERVER

Drawing a parallel between 1990 and 2019…

Has the PNC dug up its old playbook on delaying Elections?

G

eorge Santayana the Spanish philosopher, essayist, poet and novelist once said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

In Guyana’s current circumstances this quote is most apt. The APNU+AFC Coalition Government has placed the nation in a precarious position due to their refusal to honour the dictates of the constitution with respect to the successful passage of the no-confidence motion, and the subsequent ruling of the Chief Justice.

We must go back in our history to fully understand and draw the parallel to our current situation.

In 1985 the People's National Congress (PNC) won an election that was widely viewed both locally and internationally as being heavily rigged. After that controversial election, the next election was constitutionally slated to be held no later than May 1991.

The then opposition the People’s Progressive Party expected the election to be held in November 1990.

Elections were however held until October 1992, due to various shenanigans of the then PNC government. Those shenanigans are eerily similar to what is taking place at this time.

It would appear that the PNC has dug up their old playbook and running the same plays used to delay elections in 1991.

To delay the elections in 1990 the then PNC government used the excuse of the need for a new list of electors to conduct the elections. This is the same excuse being used today.

To make it seem that the Guyanese people were in favour of the House to House registration the then government called for a referendum and asked the public to vote on this.

Using the slogan “House or Mouse” they asked the public to vote on whether or not the House to House registration exercise should be conducted.

“House” signified those for the exercise and “Mouse” those against.

In an obviously rigged election, the results revealed that the referendum for the registration process was in favour of House to House registration to create a new list of electors.

The Election Commission at that time promised that the process would have been completed by May 17, 1991, and the list available for scrutiny by July 01, 1991. The list that was eventually submitted was rejected by the Opposition parties as it was riddled with numerous errors.

There were several duplications of names, and over 50,000 eligible voters were missing from the list. As a result of the need to have the list corrected elections were postponed several times, which also meant

that the life of parliament had to also be extended.

Elections was eventually held in October 1992, giving the Desmond Hoyteled PNC government almost two extra years in office.

Compare the above mentioned to what is taking place today.

The Constitution stipulates that General Elections should be held ninety days after the successful passage of a no-confidence motion.

Just like in 1990 the current Government is once again delaying elections and using the need for a new list of electors as their reason for doing so, despite this being opposed to the requirements of our Constitution. The same arguments used in 1990 with regards to the list are once again being used. Arguments such as the list is bloated with names of persons who died or migrated, and that there are a significant number of young people whose names are not on the list and using the current list will disenfranchise them.

The parallel between 1990 and 2019 does not only end at issues with the list of electors. There are many others.

An examination of the state of the country in 1990 and its current state is quite revealing.

In 1990 the Health Sector was in a terrible state.

Hospitals were in a state of disrepair; equipment

was old and consistently malfunctioned; there were shortages of basic drugs and medical supplies, and power outages at Health Institutions across the country were a common occurrence. Those issues highlighted are all part and parcel of what we are experiencing today.

In the early 1990s blackouts were a daily occurrence. Despite the strides by the PPP/C government in its years in office to arrest this problem, we have regressed since the Coalition government took office. The residents of Berbice, Essequibo and Linden can attest to this.

Blackouts have returned to these areas at levels similar to the early 1990s. Like the government’s response to correcting this has been very slow, with little or no communication coming from the authorities.

As the end of the PNC’s reign in the early 1990s, retrenchment and persons being laid off from their jobs was the order of the day. Fast forward to 2019 and the same is taking place now. Over 7000 workers were laid off from the Guyana Sugar Corporation (GuySuCo) as the government closed the sugar estates. In addition, numerous private sector businesses and organizations have had to downsize their operations resulting in them reducing their staffing as the economy continues

to contract drastically. In the midst of this, the Coalition Government has failed to advance job creation initiatives.

As the Desmond Hoyteled PNC government saw the writing on the wall that their time in office was possibly coming to an end, their already hostile treatment of the Opposition parties, in particular, the PPP increased exponentially. PPP members were subjected to intimidation by officers of the state.

Public meetings were broken up by PNC thugs and persons were arrested on frivolous charges. Those same tactics are being used today against the PPP and its supporters as the present government realize that they have lost a large percentage of their support and that their time in office is limited. Like then, PPP leaders are being subjected to unsubstantiated charges and having to appear before the courts for these matters.

An examination of all the economic indicators in 1992 time revealed that the country was in a terrible state and debt levels had skyrocketed. In less than four years of being in office, Guyana’s situation is similar. According to the Public Debt Annual Report of 2017, at the end of December 2017, Guyana’s total public debt was a massive $334.9B – an increase from 2016 by $14.3B. Of the $334.5B,

$256.2B was external debt, while $88.6B was domestic debt. In 2015, Guyana’s total public debt was $317B. Guyana’s public external debt stock also saw an increase – from US$1.162B in 2016 to US$1.24B in 2017. Of the 2017 public external debt stock, Guyana owed monies to the: Caribbean Development Bank (CDB): the Inter-American Development Bank; the International Fund for Agricultural Development; and others. Additionally, Guyana’s public domestic debt stood at some $88B at the end of 2017. The country’s total public domestic debt servicing has been on the rise. When the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) left office, debt servicing at the end of 2014, stood at $1.58B. Under the APNU+AFC Coalition Government that number has been steadily increasing: 2015 - $1.75B; 2016 - $1.92B; and 2017 $2.25B. Total public debt (the public domestic debt and the public external debt) servicing amounted to $14.8B in 2017 – an increase from $13B in 2016.

Total debt service-to-revenue ratio increase from 7.2 per cent in 2016 to 7.6 per cent in 2017.

The obvious conclusions, having drawn a parallel between 1990 and 2019, demand that all Guyanese recognize the clear choice facing our country.

WEEKEND MIRROR 6-7 APRIL, 2019

PPP/C leaders continue outreach meetings in Region 10

27

Jagdeo calls for enhanced scrutiny at polling places T

here is no need to remove the names of Guyanese living overseas, either while pursuing studies or for other reasons, from the Official List of Electors (OLE), according to Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo. He contends that enhanced scrutiny at polling stations can address concerns that may arise from this issue.

“Enhance scrutiny so you don’t have to worry about people aboard voting. So that was what we suggested (as to) how you address it. Not by removing people’s name from the OLE; that would be unconstitutional. (You) can’t remove them just like that, but have to enhance the safeguards that they don’t vote,” he said, The Opposition Leader also underscored the fact that removing the names of Guyanese from the OLE would be unconstitutional.

Article 59 of the Constitution states that: “Subject to the provisions of article 159, every person may vote at an election if he or she is of age eighteen years or upwards and is either a citizen of Guyana or a Commonwealth citizen domiciled and resident in Guyana.”

“You cannot remove people’s name from a list if you’re simply abroad because what if you abroad for two or five months? Then you will lose your rights to vote, because your name would not be on the voters’ list,” Jagdeo argued.

On the question of whether the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) would be interested in working out a deal with the APNU+AFC Coalition Government to have names removed from the OLE, the Opposition Leader responded with an emphatic no. He explained that for the 1997 elections, the PPP/C agreed with the then Parliamentary Opposition, the People’s National Congress (PNC), and ended up losing two years of its term in office owing to litigation filed by the PNC. He said, “PNC and PPP agreed to use voters’ ID as identification absolutely necessary for voting. The same PNC, after losing elections, filed a case that the use of ID is unconstitutional and the elections were vitiated. We lost two years of our term, not because there was fraudulent elections, but because the arrangement we made with PNC was deemed unconstitutional. So we’re not interested in making no arrangements like that, so they can go challenge it again.”

Jagdeo also ruled out using immigration records to cleanse the OLE, saying that it would not properly reflect the movement of Guyanese. Instead, Jagdeo suggested that a parallel list be prepared in addition to the OLE, which would still have the names of overseas Guyanese. “Each Presiding Officer will have the Official List of Electors and

they would have a list of the immigration records of people who have been abroad for over three months,” he noted. This way, he noted that if someone from the immigration list shows up to vote, then an alarm should be raised and that person will be thoroughly vetted and scrutinised before being allowed to vote.

The Opposition Leader proposed too that monies be set aside to hire extra polling agents, in addition to those appointed by the parties, and to have an observer in each of the 2,200 polling stations to lessen the chances of illegal voting and ensure that those eligible to vote are able to do so – a proposal that he disclosed was raised with President David Granger.

“GECOM (Guyana Elections Commission), themselves, have been arguing how robust their system with the Presiding Officer is. So, you would not have people, even with their names on the list and they may be abroad, they wouldn’t be able to vote and that would work well with us because we don’t steal no votes,” he said.

There has been no indication that the APNU+AFC Coalition is open to the proposals for enhanced scrutiny that were made by the Opposition Leader.

Notably, despite strong objections, GECOM is moving ahead with the conduct of house-to-house registration.

ERC report into GECOM’s hiring practices exposes gov’t effort to wield total control – Edghill

W

eeks after the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC) handed its report to the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) – on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 – there has been no action taken by the Commission.

The ERC was tasked with probing the hiring practices of GECOM following a complaint lodged by the three Opposition-nominated GECOM Commissioners. The call for an investigation came after the top-ranked candidate applying for the post of Deputy Chief Elections Officer (DCEO), Vishnu Persaud, was passed over for the post. The three PPP-nominated Commis-

sioners, in a joint complaint letter, called for a full investigation on the hiring practices at GECOM last year. The Commissioners charged that the state of affairs is “clearly indicative of a larger issue at the Guyana Elections Commission, which has an adverse effect on ethnic relations and harmony in Guyana.” ‘ The investigation’s main finding was that Persaud was the most qualified person for the job.

Former Chairman of the ERC and current Opposition Parliamentarian, Juan Edghill, in commenting on the issue said, “It is clear that the Guyana Elections Commission had a hidden

agenda that was carefully designed to ensure that the former Deputy Chief Elections Officer did not get the job that he applied for.

It is clear that a decision was made somewhere that Roxanne Myers would get the job.

“This was a grand scheme in a political game to ensure that, not only at the Commission that the Government has control of GECOM – with its three government-nominated Commissioners and a unilaterally appointed Chairman – but also to ensure that the government has control of the GECOM Secretariat as well. This is worrying for Guyana.

(Turn to page 25)

PUBLISHED BY NEW GUYANA Co. Ltd., 8 Industrial Site, Ruimveldt, Georgetown, Guyana. Tel: 226-2473, 226-5875 Fax: 226-2472