Weekend Mirror 11-12 July 2020 by Weekend Mirror

Next moves clearly outlined by the CCJ – Nandlall 11-12 July, 2020 / Vol. 11 No. 30 / Price: $100

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

PAGE 2

CCJ judgment has far reaching impacts for democracy – Ali PAGE 16

Final declaration must be made ‘without delay’ – CARICOM Chair PPP calls on ERC to investigate, act in complaint about racially divisive comments PAGE 3

PAGE 8

SEE INSIDE

Still no final declaration of election results after over 130 days ‒ GECOM meeting adjourned to July 11th PAGE 10

Emerging evidence to show that COVID-19 spreads in the air – WHO

PAGE 23

More workers on the breadline PAGE 9

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

Next moves clearly outlined by the CCJ – Nandlall

he APNU+AFC Coalition is guilty of disseminating misinformation, over the past 128-plus days, more recently about the ruling handed down by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) on Wednesday (July 8, 2020), according to People’s Progressive Party (PPP) Executive, Anil Nandlall. Appearing on the Trinidad and Tobago’s ‘Early Morning Show’ on Thursday (July 9, 2020), he said, “The CCJ has pronounced. In every free and democratic society, governed by a Constitution, like ours, the apex court – the judiciary – is the sole and conclusive determiner of all legal issues….the CCJ has pronounced. Whether we accept it or not, democracy and the rule of law dictate that you must accept the decision of the court, especially the final court.” According to him, there is no legal provision that precludes the CCJ from assuming jurisdiction to make the ruling it did – which is that the Appeal Court had no jurisdiction when it ruled in a challenge filed by the Coalition’s Eslyn David and that the June 23rd report of the Chief Elections Officer (CEO), Keith Lowenfield,

was invalid. “The CCJ and the lawyers who were involved dealt with this matter frontally. We embraced their objection and we examined the objection, as did the Court in its detailed and written ruling…it is not that decisions in a particular category of cases are not un-appealable to the CCJ. There is such a provision in Guyana’s Constitution,” the PPP Executive said. The CCJ in its ruling, at paragraph 53, said: “That decision (of the Appeal Court) was made without jurisdiction on the part of that Court. It was therefore not final and is of no effect. This Court is entitled and required to declare it invalid. Logically, the report of 23 June issued by the CEO which was based on it is similarly of no effect.” At paragraph 56 of the ruling, the CCJ ordered that: “The said decision of the Court of Appeal was made without jurisdiction, is invalid and of no effect. The Court declares that the report of the Chief Election Officer of 23 June 2020 is similarly of no effect.” Nandlall charged as part of the Coalition’s “conspiracy to rig” the March 2020 General and Regional Elec-

tions, the Coalition “dressmade” a case – essentially a disguised elections petition – to continue their perversity, but failed as a result of the CCJ ruling. He said, “Every single attempt of theirs to pervert and rig the election has been uncovered because, largely, they are a bunch of incompetent people. They misunderstood the law, they miscalculated, so when the matter reached the CCJ they were like headless chickens trying to attack the Court…trying to threaten the survival of the Court…who behaves like that other than authoritarians and political dictators? If your case is fair and your case is in accordance with the law, would you not welcome scrutiny and endorsement from the highest judicial tribunal in your country? Who hides?” Questioned on the response of the APNU+AFC Coalition to the CCJ ruling, particularly the reaction of the Coalition leader, David Granger, Nandlall noted that the positions of the Coalition defy logic. On the way forward, the PPP Executive charged that the CCJ was clear. “What happens next has been clearly outlined by the CCJ, which

is what our laws and Constitution say on the issue. No one is in doubt on this. We have been saying this all the time. It is they who rushed to the court and prevented the conclusion of the electoral process, in accordance with law. “The process is that GECOM (Guyana Elections Commission) must direct the Chief Elections Officer to prepare his statutory report, obviously in accordance with the votes counted at the recount….the CEO, as the CCJ said, must be redirected by the Commission to say ‘go and prepare your report’ as is required by law using the numbers generated, the results generated, by the recount process. “…the only voice in the wilderness, the only dissenting narrative, is coming from this deranged cabal, which sees the whole world differently and sees their own story in their own light. It cannot be that the entire world is wrong and they are right.” “…they somehow think that a CEO, a Chief Elections Officer, can lock himself in a room, throw away the election results and tabulate a result of his own. How they persuade themselves

that this is logical and they can sell that nationally and internationally, I don’t know. It is a level on insanity that you are dealing with that require some kind of deep psychoanalysis. But the fact is that the CEO can throw away the ballots of the people, the results of the recount and can actually present his own results. They are holding steadfast to that view. The CCJ explained clearly that this is not possible.” The CCJ in its ruling, at paragraph 17, said: “Ostensibly basing himself upon the Decision of the Court of Appeal majority, he (Chief Elections Officer, Keith Lowenfield) took it upon himself to invalidate such votes as he considered ought to be invalidated. This new report of his purported to invalidate well over 100,000 votes that had previously been counted and certified as valid votes within the meaning of the Representation of the People Act.” At paragraph 45 of the CCJ ruling, it added that: “Validity in this context means, and could only mean, those votes that, ex facie, are valid. The determination of such validity is a transparent exercise that weeds out of the process, for example, spoilt

or rejected ballots. This is an exercise conducted in the presence of, inter alia, the duly appointed candidates and counting agents of contesting parties. It is after such invalid votes are weeded out that the remaining ‘valid votes’ count towards a determination of not only the members of the National Assembly but, incidentally as well, the various listed Presidential candidates. If the integrity of a ballot, or the manner in which a vote was procured, is questioned beyond this validation exercise, say because of some fundamental irregularity such as those alleged by Mr Harmon, then that would be a matter that must be pursued through Article 163 (which provides for the filing of an elections petition) after the elections have been concluded.” In the event that the Chief Elections Officer fails to comply, Nandlall stated that actions would have to be taken. “Since it is a responsibility and a duty that the Constitution reposes in a CEO and you have a rogue CEO who is refusing to discharge his mandate then you will have to get another CEO. It is as simple as that…anyone who attempts to defend Lowen-

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

Final declaration must No more delays be made ‘without delay’ – Canada’s Global Affairs deputy Minister – CARICOM Chair C

hairman of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and Prime Minister of St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Dr Ralph Gonsalves, welcomed the ruling of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) as another step in finalising the March 2020 electoral process. And he stressed that the final declaration must be made without delay. “The Court’s ruling should lead to a declaration by the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) of the results of the General and Regional

Elections held on 2 March 2020, without further delay,” the CARICOM Chairman said in a statement on Thursday (July 9, 2020). On the ruling, Gonsalves said, “The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) welcomes the progress towards the finalisation of the electoral process in Guyana following the ruling of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) on Wednesday 8 July. The Community calls on all stakeholders to respect the ruling of the CCJ, Guyana’s final court of appeal. “Indeed, the CCJ in the

summary judgement aptly stated: ‘It has been four months since the elections were held and the country has been without a Parliament for well over a year. No one in Guyana would regard this to be a satisfactory state of affairs. We express the fervent hope that there would quickly be a peaceable restoration of normalcy’.” CARICOM, according to him, commends the continuing patience and calm of the people of Guyana and calls on all stakeholders to respect the rule of law.

US Congressman calls on State Dep’t to ensure democratic transition of gov’t I n a letter to the United State of America’s (USA) Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, US Congressman, Bill Posey, called for action to ensure that democracy is not derailed in Guyana. The Congressman’s letter follows strong comments from Pompeo early this month about actions that will be taken if there is not a democratic transition of government. Pompeo on July 1, 2020 had said, “It has been four months since Guyana’s elections – long past due for a peaceful transition of power. CARICOM and the OAS have certified the

recount result. They should get on with it. I have instructed my Department to ensure those who undermine Guyana’s democracy are held accountable.” Posey, in his letter dated July 6, 2020, said, “In your July 1, 2020 press conference, you said it has now been four months since Guyana’s election and that it is long past due for a peaceful transition of power. You have instructed the State Department to ensure that those who undermine Guyana’s democracy are held accountable…I have twice written to President Granger to urge him to obey the will of his people

as expressed in free and fair elections.” The US Congressman pledged his “full support” for action by the US State Department to ensure the peaceful transition of power to a new and “duly elected” government in Guyana. “I ask the State Department to continue to do everything within its power to bring about the transition to a new government,” Posey said. Democracy and freedom combined with a free enterprise economy, according to him, is what Guyana needs now to grow its economy and promote the well-being of Guyanese.

Next moves clearly outlined... field’s fraud are as guilty as him….the world is aware of the dereliction of duty that we saw from Lowenfield,” he said. On questions about resistance to a democratic transition of government by the APNU+AFC Coalition or compromised staffers of the GECOM Secretariat and possible recourses for the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C), Nandlall explained that the struggle will continue to ensure that democracy prevails. He said, “The monster that we are facing is that on March 2nd the APNU+AFC lost the elections and they knew that from the night of March 2nd. There is no doubt about that…what they have been doing since is

implement one morbid artifice after another in order to defeat the will of the electorate, to rig the elections and to steal the next government. We have come this far. I am not sure whether they will stop….we have been able to block them at every stage of the way. “Now we have reached, virtually, at the end and the CCJ has made all the pronouncements as clear as possible, in the context available to them. GECOM cannot claim lack of clarity on anything anymore. To their credit, the CCJ with great clarity and great erudition, outline the laws of Guyana and the pathway forward, in terms of brining this process to the end. “If at the end of this pro-

(From page 2)

cess, the rigging cabal – who are known to defy the rule of law, defy constitutionality, defy democracy – refuse to relinquish the reins of government, well then we will have to up the ante of the struggle and we are prepared to do that. “This train is only going in one direction – the direction of removing the government that has lost the Elections and install the government elected by the people…no doubt they have tried to derail us, no doubt… we are going to travel with the train and see where it takes us.” Guyanese have now waited more than four months for the finalization of the March 2020 electoral process.

anada’s Assistant Deputy Minister for the Americas at Global Affairs, Michael Grant, was no holds barred in underscoring that there can be “no more delays” in the conclusion of Guyana’s electoral process. Following the ruling of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), on Wednesday (July 8, 2020), he said, “[An) important ruling today from [the] Caribbean Court of Justice. It is time for the election results to be announced by GECOM based on the recount. No more delays. “ Grant has also warned that the legitimacy of the government of Guyana depends on credibly declared results from the March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections. On March 23, 2020, he had said, “We believe a recount of the ballots is necessary to ensure that every vote is counted. The will of the people must be respected for Canada to rec-

ognise the legitimacy of a duly elected government.” The international community has been clear on the consequences that would follow if democracy was derailed in Guyana. The United Kingdom, Foreign Secretary, Dominic Raab, who talked about sanctions and international condemnation. On March 24, 2020, he said, “The transition of government in Guyana should only take place in line with transparent and democratic principles that lead to credible results. Any government sworn in on the basis of non-credible results will face strong international condemnation. If the situation continues to deteriorate, this international response will include a range of serious consequences for those concerned.” More recently, the European Ambassador to Guyana, Fernando Ponz-Cantó, warned of about the sus-

pension of cooperation with Guyana and other consequences if democracy is derailed. He said, “If situations like these are not remedied democratically, then the EU has the duty and the determination to act according to the principles we share… one of those principles, and perhaps the most important one, is democracy. If anybody does not recognize the democratic provisions, there will be a suspension of the cooperation…we have done it, unfortunately, quite a few times in Africa – I was involved in several of those processes – we did it once in the Caribbean in Haiti several years ago, and if there is a breach of democracy, we will have to do it because we are bound by those provisions.” Other international organizations have also issued stern warnings, including the Commonwealth and the Organization of American States (OAS).

Time for GECOM to declare election winner based on recount results - Kozak

representative from the United States of America’s State Department, this week, joined a list of regional and international bodies calling for a credible conclusion to the electoral process, which has gone on for over 128 days now. The Acting Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere Affairs of the US State Department, Michael Kozak, on Wednesday (July 8, 2020) said, “The Caribbean Court has ruled. It is time for GECOM to declare the winner of Guyana’s election based on the national recount vote. The will of Guyana’s voters cannot be ignored.” Kozak, last month, had stressed that the will of the Guyanese people must not be subverted. He had said, “Guyana’s electorate spoke clearly & respected international observers. We join them in calling for a conclu-

sion to the electoral process in #Guyana & the announcement of a winner.” Further, last week, in the strongest signal to Guyana yet, authorities in the United States of America (USA) have made it clear that the undermining of democracy in Guyana will not be tolerated. US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, on Wednesday (July 1, 2020) said, “It has been four months since Guyana’s elections – long past due for a peaceful transition of power. CARICOM and the OAS have certified the recount result. They should get on with it. I have instructed my Department to ensure those who undermine Guyana’s democracy are held accountable.” Pompeo had warned on March 17, 2020 that those who seek to benefit from electoral fraud will be subject to serious conse-

quences. In comments about Guyana, during a news conference then, he had said: “The United States is closely monitoring the tabulation of votes in Guyana; the election took place on March 2. We join the OAS, Commonwealth, the EU, CARICOM and other democratic partners in calling for an accurate count…. it is important to note that the individuals who seek to benefit from electoral fraud and to form illegitimate governments, regimes, will be subject to variety of serious consequences from the United States.” Several representatives from the international community have made clear that a transition of government that is done without transparency, credibility and not in keeping with democratic principles will trigger consequences.

EDITORIAL Efforts to frustrate democracy opened up space for dynamism our democracy will benefit from

he last 130-plus days have seen the advance of one effort after another to frustrate the democratic process that would allow for a transition of government – even after the national recount provided clarity on the electoral outcome, which is that the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) secured majority support. Based on the national recount, which ended on June 9, 2020, there were a total of 460,352 valid votes, of which the PPP/C secured over 233,000 votes. The PPP/C, based on the recount results, won the March 2020 Elections by over 15,000 votes at the general level and won by over 16,000 votes at the regional level. What played out over the last few months can only be described as a combination of naked corruption and dishonesty – a calculated attempt to steal the March 2020 General and Regional Elections and subvert the will of the Guyanese people. Guyanese are, by now, fully aware that the David Granger-led APNU+AFC Coalition was more than willing to put the future collective prosperity of all our people at risk for the sake of political power. However, as frustrating as the March 2020 electoral process was, there was hope to be found. Civil society, the opposition political parties and civic-minded Guyanese demonstrated a capacity for peaceful, yet active, dissent. The activism seen over the past four months – from those involved in guarding the ballot boxes until the national recount was completed to others engaged in calling out actions that were aimed at taking Guyana down a regressive path – is laudable. This silver lining, amid the frustrations that the Guyanese people have endured, is key to aiding the moved towards a better future for Guyana and the Guyanese people. It also bodes well for Guyana to build on the democratic gains made since the first free and fair elections in 1992 – gains that were threatened since the APNU+AFC Coalition took office in May 2015 – because it opens up a space for a dynamism that our nascent democracy needs. Further, it bodes well for advances that will bolster our credentials as a country, among the global fold of democratic nations. There is also a role every Guyanese can play. Moving forward, Guyanese must resist all undemocratic methods and practices that will lead to a crumbling society with no hope for the future. Founder of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP), former president and Father of the Nation, Dr Cheddi Jagan, once said: “The right to vote was won for you by the PPP in the early 1950s. One of the first battles we fought was for the right of every Guyanese to vote. Universal adult suffrage was and is for us a fundamental question. Without that, there can be no democracy. And without democracy, there can be no progress….lack of democracy has taken its toll. Coupled with incorrect economic planning strategy, wrong priorities, political and racial discrimination, extravagance end corruption, it has put a brake, on production and productivity…we must struggle for democracy. It will not come as a gift.” Guyanese would do well to remember that our democracy was won through struggle and its preservation will demand the same.

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

PNC-led Coalition has no other option, but to respect will of people Dear Editor,

he ruling handed down by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), Guyana’s apex court, has literally pushed the PNCR to the end of the road. Their attempt to allow Lowenfield to interpret and apply, in his report to the Elections Commission, the Court of Appeal’s (CoA) ruling on “valid” votes was dumped by the CCJ in its unanimous ruling. The President of the Court, Justice Adrian Saunders, in his erudite, unambiguous and intellectually stimulating presentation, said the CCJ has jurisdiction to hear the matters on appeal brought before it by Bharrat Jagdeo and Irfaan Ali. He further stated that there was nothing in Eslyn David’s application to trigger the CoA’s jurisdiction. Having asserted its jurisdiction in the matters, Justice Saunders noted that, for example, the word “valid” is mentioned several times in the law, and that only valid votes are counted after a tough screening process. There is no need for any refinement. The ruling by the CoA on “valid” votes was to give Lowenfield the ability to discard what he determined were invalid votes.

And Lowenfield did that by arbitrarily rejecting over 115,844 votes in his report to the GECOM Chair. The President of the CCJ admonished Lowenfield for usurping the power of the High Court, which is the duly constitutional body to deal with such matters as allegations of electoral fraud via an election petition. The CCJ also stated that since a President has not yet been elected, it is improper to inquire into his qualifications. This could only be done after the President is elected/installed. The CCJ therefore declared the Lowenfield report to the GECOM Chair invalid, and advised that Lowenfield provide the figures from the recount, as directed by GECOM Chair. Since it is pellucid from the ruling of CCJ that Lowenfield has no power to reduce or eliminate any valid vote of the recount, he is forced to submit, in his new report, only the official recount figures. He will not be able to seek shelter in any law or judicial ruling, as he did previously with the CoA ruling. The only option for Lowenfield is for him to submit the real recount figures, which show that the PPPC won the 2020 elections by 15,416 votes. As part of this new report, he has to

work out the allocation of Parliamentary and Regional seats. What is striking also is that before the highly anticipated CCJ’s ruling, the ABCE ambassadors and high commissioners met with the Guyana Foreign Minister and insisted that a declaration must be on the basis of the recount figures. They are also reinforcing the conclusion of the Caricom High Level Team that scrutinised the recount process. The Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo says that they are delighted with the CCJ’s ruling, and asks Guyanese to listen carefully to the CCJ’s judgment. But he cautions, “Let’s see what is next on their (PNCR) agenda.” Just after the ruling, a crowd of PNCR supporters gathered by State House, where President Granger explained that the matter is now in the hands of GECOM, and further stated that the CCJ cannot instruct GECOM what to do. I wonder who could! The CCJ’s ruling has been received with great joy by all the people with whom I spoke. They say, “It’s a win for democracy and for Guyana.” Sincerely, Dr Tara Singh

Days of discarding democracy are over Dear Editor,

t has been alleged that fractions of the PNC/PNCR have hijacked airtime on NCN, the State-owned TV broadcast station, demanding four spots daily, spreading propaganda and falsehood across Guyana. These are die-hard members who are bent on A Partnership for National Unity/ Alliance For Change (APNU/AFC) remaining in power regardless of the price Guyana pays or how this is done. The current elections impasse has evolved to a war of attrition between PNCR and the rest of the world. These PNCR leaders are blatantly incapable of treating their own people (supporters) properly, so they can hardly be expected to treat the Caricom leaders and the rest of the world leaders well. How can a political party like the PNCR that doggedly refuses to acknowledge that they have lost the 2020 General Elections while refusing to become a modern political civilisation really expect to be part of a meaningful opposition in the future? The group that is described as the

Burnhamite faction is real, they exist and they have taken over control of the PNCR, aided and abetted by a compliant protege of the founder leader. Former Prime Minister and President Forbes Burnham stayed in power from 1968 to 1985 through elections that many local and foreign observers described as fraudulent. However during this electoral period twice before, this small but influential cabal within the PNCR was thwarted in their efforts to seize control of the election results and tailored it to the benefit of the APNU/AFC Presidential Candidate David Granger. This faction will fight to the bitter end since their good life is threatened. The PNCR simply do not care about the threat of sanctions; they believe they can ride it out, the importance of Guyanese being able to elect a Government of their choice, through free and fair elections is like preaching to the choir. That means nothing to the PNCR cabals, they are not concerned if the supporters of all political parties suffer, providing that the PNCR masterminds will continue to enjoy the good life. We do not have a crystal ball to predict how it

will all end on July 8, 2020, but one can see the APNU/AFC leadership’s struggle in the PNCR control environment being played out on NCN daily and nightly on TV programmes. The mindset of the PNC/PNCR is to wage a war of attrition. Observers have left, locals will get fed up and weary. Mr Granger said that he has great respect for the people of Guyana, his Caribbean colleagues and the international community, “but if he does, how come every day and night he allows his party comrades to denigrate our great Caribbean leaders? And their (Caribbean leaders) only fault is that they continue to speak the truth – that the recount results must be used to declare the victor – which has already been decided by the GECOM Commission, itself. So, they’re (Caribbean leaders) only reiterating what the Commission would have decided already. The region will hypocritically posit themselves as peace brokers and events like COVID-19 will shift focus to survival. This is not about Guyana but about a handful of greedy PNCR individuals who caricature Dr (Turn to page 5)

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

Hamilton Green and those of his ilk have no moral authority to lecture about democracy

Open letter to David Granger: Will of I the majority cannot be ignored

Dear Editor,

Dear President Granger,

he Caribbean Hindu Cultural Society (CHCS) London, UK, is very concerned that It is now four months since the general and regional elections were held in Guyana and there is no declaration of the results since the count and then the recount. The International CARICOM observers and ABCE diplomats have all vouched that Guyana 2020 elections were free, fair and credible, and that all votes cast were valid. With almost one voice, you were urged to accept the result of the recount, concede defeat and arrange for a peaceful transfer of government. This you have steadfastly refused to do. We urge you to accept their recommendations and act without further delay, to restore peace, harmony and confidence in our lead-

ers by the people of Guyana. Elections must be conducted on the basis on Dharma, and must give importance to justice, uprightness, rectitude, purity in thought, words and deed. Guyana is potentially a rich county but faces serious socio-economic and health problems if the “democratic will” of the majority is ignored. It is in the national interest that the main political parties are able to work in co-operation to deal with these, The wealth of Guyana belong to all its people and we need a stable government that governs in an equitable manner so that all its citizens may enjoy the future economic success of the country. Regards, Moti Sukhlal (President) Deo Jairam (Secretary)

Ramjattan peddling devious tales Dear Editor,

bout three weeks ago, Guyana’s Prime Minister-in-waiting, Khemraj Ramjattan, told his Public Security Ministry’s staff that he had conceded defeat to the March 2, 2020 elections. The same week he was on the ruling APNU/AFC’s bandwagon trying to block the official declaration of the new President of Guyana, Dr Irfaan Ali. Every day, Ramjattan comes up with a devious tale. One such story told a long time ago was that he had provided security for the endangered politician Charrandas Persaud to Timehri Airport when the man actually left Guyana from Ogle Airport. Then he said he had captured two Russians and deported them, but a third escaped. Ramjattan also appeared on Trinidad’s CCN TV 6 saying that PPP General Secretary Bharrat Jagdeo has been spreading racism. Wrong again! Since 1964, former dictator President Forbes Burnham had used the tactic of “divide and rule.” This is what APNU/AFC’s President David Granger, Ramjattan and their cabal are now doing. They are telling lies to incite civil unrest. The APNU/AFC, the PPP/C and GECOM participated in the electoral process which was observed by Caricom and other interna-

tional agencies. Where was the opportunity for the Opposition parties to commit fraud? There was not even one chance to do it with a fake ID How can there be 285,000 bogus votes? The facts and evidence are glaring that the Opposition PPP/C won the elections. Yet Ramjattan is mischievously peddling these outrageous lies. The other is that the PPP/C had rigged the elections. Why are Ramjattan, Granger and their cabal holding a whole nation to ransom for four months, trying every trick to hijack the elections? Since Burnham was President, the majorly of Guyanese were marginalised. And now Ramjattan is teaming up with the enemy, the same PNC-led APNU/AFC coalition. The PNC has had its knee on the neck of the people of Guyana since 1964. Shame on Ramjattan and his conspirators who are peddling fiction all the way to the courts to try to make it a reality. Thank God for the intervention of the US Carter Center and other international observers. The PP/C will liberate all Guyanese from the bondage of dictatorship. Truth always triumphs over lies, and good will overcome evil. Sincerely, F. Mohammed

read with amazement a letter written by Hamilton Green lecturing the Chairman of Caricom, Dr Ralph Gonsalves. I found Green’s letter ironic in so many ways. Green, who was part of election rigging in Guyana that disenfranchised voters for decades and who is also alleged to have been involved in many other atrocities against his fellow Guyanese, is lecturing Ralph Gonsalves for being very vocal and rightly so, in fighting for the will of the voters in Guyana to be respected. Green is suggesting that Dr Gonsalves should take a page out of the book of many other Caricom Heads of Government and leaders of political and social grouping – to “maintain a level of cohesion and comradery within Caricom”. Green goes on to do what many of his comrades in the PNC have done, he attempts to throw mud on Dr Gonsalves and to lecture us on democracy which is something that he obviously never believed in when he was a senior member of the PNC regime that stole democracy from Guyanese. Is Green living in a fantasy world? Doesn’t Green realise that Caricom and the free world are not accepting electoral fraud? It is unfortunate that dinosaurs like Green have not figured out that electoral fraud in 2020 is not acceptable and sticking together for some deprived higher cause is not an option. Green and his ilk were directly responsible for the exodus of thousands of Guyanese and unlike Hamilton Green, many Guya-

nese in and out of Guyana are happy that Mia Mottley, Ralph Gonsalves, EU, USA, Canada etc are standing up against electoral fraud in Guyana. Those dark days of election rigging of the PNC should not be allowed to return to our country and the voices of everyone fighting for democracy in Guyana including Caricom are welcome. I remember Hamilton Green writing that he resides in the US. If he continues to do so, he should, like other Guyanese living in the US, embrace democracy especially on the weekend of July 4, and try and hope for the same in Guyana. He should also repent for the many years that he participated as one of the leaders of the PNC in depriving Guyanese of free and fair elections and consider doing the right thing by calling upon the current leadership of the PNC to accept and respect the will of the voters and stand with the voices of democracy. Maybe one day, those that were involved in the electoral fraud of the PNC during that dark period when Green was one of their leaders and those involved now will suffer consequences for their unfortunate actions. Fortunately, unlike back then, Caricom and others are standing firmly on the right side of history. I invite Hamilton Green to do the same. Editor, It is my hope that the voices of those fighting for democracy in Guyana prevail and we keep democracy alive in Guyana!!! Sincerely, C De Barros

Days of discarding... Jagdeo as the enemy. However when these elections are all over Dr Jagdeo will come out as the champion of democracy and the Guyanese people, with David Granger being referred to in Caribbean history books as the “Sanctimonious Gangster”. We should not be under any illusion – The APNU/AFC Government will continue as is for as long as they can get away with it, without the will of the people. They have implemented a strategy to repeat what the PNC did between 1968 and 1992 – rig elections in order to remain in power It is intended to be a silent coup, but the stink it has already created is a nightmare for the Granger caretaker Government. The rotten stench is in every home and every corner in our country. It has reached the international communities, wherever you freedom-loving Guyanese are, especially those who fought and sacrificed to gain freedom in our country, you are no longer under any illusion – Granger has used the AFC, like Burnham used the UF, to seize power and deny the Guyanese people their right to elect a Government. Just as Granger is trying to do in 2020. These moves by David Granger in his full support of the report submitted by the Chief Elections Officer, Lowenfield, in which 115,844 votes were discarded due to “anomalies and irregularities” which

(From page 4)

he knew were all lies and false. It is not shocking. The DNA of Granger is solidly the DNA of Burnham and the PNC. He has done exactly what the People’s Progressive Party/Civic warned Guyanese about prior to the 2015 elections. Granger has used the AFC to gain power, much like Burnham and the PNC used the UF to gain power. However, Granger has not waited as long as Burnham did to discard the AFC. During the electoral process, Granger, Harmon, Mingo Lowenfield and Norton unequivocally declared that the APNU/ AFC coalition has served its purpose and it is time for the PNC to expose itself. It never disappeared, it disguised itself and now it is ready to assume its place. As of now, “APNU/AFC is just a name”. The caretaker Government of Guyana is the PNC/PNCR. It is clear that PNC is hoping that everyone will be scared of them and stay easy but sadly this time around will not be so easy, the PNC and PNCR are in for a rude awakening, the will of the Guyanese people will prevail in 2020. Let me remind you all, the Burnhamite days are over, it is dead and cannot be resurrected. Sincerely, David Adams

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

Coalition squandered opportunity to secure respect of Guyanese

APNU+AFC Coalition lost the confidence of electorate T because of its own actions

Dear Editor,

here is no mystery regarding the electoral defeat of the APNU/AFC at the 2020 elections. The reasons for the party’s performance at these elections are apparent for the most casual observer. From the time it assumed office in 2015, the party committed a series of mistakes that conspired to make it unsuitable for managing our affairs. The most obvious ones are: 1. The increase in salary and benefits for Ministers that were first disputed then later justified with ridiculous explanations by Government officials. 2. The ruthless dismissals of the CSOs and sugar workers. 3. The discontinuation of the year-end bonus granted to the Disciplined Services’ members and initiatives that supported at-risk groups, eg, cash grants for school children, water and electricity subsidy for pensioners, and elimination of the basket of zero-rated goods 4. The secretive signing bonus that was also denied before later confirmed with outlandish excuses. 5. The total disregard for the party’s promise to fulfil its promise of more jobs, better living conditions, housing, and social services that motivated swing voters to support the party in 2015. 6. The undemocratic traits such as the unilateral appointment of the Chairman of GECOM and refusal to accept the No-Confidence Motion and resign and call elections as prescribed by the Constitution. 7. The punitive tax measures that crippled the productive sectors, mining, agriculture, and manufacturing, invoked the Private Sector’s wrath. 8. The countless shady deals and non-value-added transactions (eg, dietary and travel that cost the treasury billions). These mistakes painted the APNU/AFC as an uncaring, self-serving, and untrustworthy group of people whose value system was incompatible with the “middle,” that is, the 20 per cent of voters who will decide the Government now and in the future. This group of voters does not vote race but issues. They are young professionals who are smarter than the people directly involved in politics but prefer to live quietly in the background. This group is not only here to stay but will grow in the future. No political party can afford to ignore this group of voters since they will make ethnic voting an unfeasible strategy now and in the future. From the mistakes of the APNU/AFC, the party obviously ignored this group of voters. They probably felt that since they controlled the three arms of the State, this group of professionals will be no match. They controlled Parliament by occupying the seats of the Speaker and Deputy Speaker. They exercised total control over the bureaucracy and, to a lesser extent, the Judiciary where they were able to prevent an election petition from being heard after five years while obtaining deci-

sions from the Appeal Court that tarnished the jurisprudence in Guyana and Caribbean. With that amount of control, it is understandable that the APNU/AFC ignored the “middle” and instead went down the road of creating a dictatorship that guarantees political office with the least effort. The signal was sent very early not only by the Machiavellian changes in the guards of the arms of the State and electoral body but a question the leader a group of supporters “How did the PNC gain and retain power?” That question was intended to be rhetorical based on our recorded history. While it was supposed to be smooth sailing to a dictatorship, the middle exposed the fallacy of the APNU/AFC at the right moment. They did not take their fight to the streets but engaged the APNU/AFC in the courts while establishing ties with the international community with the muscle to neutralise this party. The APNU/AFC never anticipated this response because they underestimated the intellectual prowess of the middle. Today they are backed into a corner where they are alone against the entire international community. My prediction is that the APNU/AFC will not give up. The party has expressed this publicly through one of its powerhouses who said it would not concede. Too much is at stake. Based on the many shady transactions, a small group within the party’s leadership risks losing their freedom. The party will not be able to return to power in the short or medium-term because of its performance. Even if the party manages to maintain its core support base, the APNU/AFC cannot gain electoral success without the middle that will remember the torment it endured since December 2018. Losing power threatens the survival of a political monster, APNU/AFC, with control over the State’s coercive arms. In such a situation, the seizure of power by force is a viable option. Next week, the avenue for using the court will be reduced, and a decision will have to be made if this option should be utilised. Should this option be activated, the change will be swift. The geopolitical conditions render it extremely dangerous for Caricom and the West. While the end to the political impasse is around the corner, it will not end the struggle for political space by the supporters of the APNU/AFC. This group that makes up more than 30 per cent of the population and consists of persons from various ethnic, professional, and religious backgrounds will agitate for space within the political landscape. This group’s struggle will manifest in various forms necessitating a workable formula where it does not feel alienated. The new Government must, therefore, consider the fears and anxiety of this segment of the population as it attempts to navigate Guyana through the troubles of COVID-19 and a bankrupted economy bequeathed by the APNU/AFC. With regards, S. Pasha

he leaders of the APNU+AFC coalition, specifically David Granger, must concede defeat to respect the will of the Guyanese people. Surely, coalition leaders must understand that, by both local and international standards, they have lost these elections, and their current actions are working against the best interest of that party. If they continue to prevent a legitimate government from taking office, they would have damaged their credibility to the extent that future prospects of holding electoral office would be greatly diminished and disrespected by many Guyanese. The refusal to concede defeat by supporters and leaders of the incumbent A Partnership for National Unity/Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) coalition has seen the coalition squander their opportunity to be a respected opposition in the elections’ aftermath. Four months have passed since Guyana’s March 2 regional and national elections were held, and there is no winner legally and formally declared through free, fair, and transparent means. The longevity of the political crisis has drawn criticism from important international and regional partners such as the United States; the Organization of American States (OAS); the Commonwealth of Nations; and, most notably, the Caribbean Community (Caricom). The latest incident in a series of unnecessary events has come from an injunction filed by an APNU/AFC supporter to stop the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) – the statutory body responsible for declaring a winner – from declaring the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) party and its presidential candidate Dr. Irfaan Ali the winners of these elections. The APNU/AFC supporter claims that GECOM has not taken into account the coalition’s concerns over the validity of votes. The APNU+AFC coalition also claims that, throughout the recount process, evidence of ghosts voting had been uncovered, leading to the party’s calls to discount votes they consider as not valid. However, the coalition’s claims are unsubstantiated, and have been settled internationally, regionally, and domestically; with CARICOM and other international observers and local stakeholders in Guyana’s electoral process approving the recount as valid and credible, based on CARICOM’s assessment, described as the most legitimate international observer by Mr David Granger. Dr Irfaan Ali, then, must be declared the next President of Guyana. But in a 2-1 ruling, Guyana’s Court of Appeal granted the injunction which ordered that the results of the elections must be determined after the Court of Appeal’s ruling. GECOM CEO Keith Lowenfield, who feels he is above the law, proceeded to submit an observation report that was contrary to the report submitted by CARICOM. In his report, Lowenfield argued that based on his own assessment of “valid” votes cast

— which is irrespective of the consensus reached by CARICOM and local observers —115,000 votes had to be eliminated. This trickery gave the Granger APNU/AFC enough votes to be declared the winner of the national elections. After the injunction was issued and Lowenfield’s report was submitted, PPP/C leader Mr Bharrat Jagdeo filed an appeal to the country’s final court of appeal, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). After the initial hearing on July 1, the Court is expected to issue its verdict on July 8. Until then, the CCJ has ruled, Guyana must remain without a declared winner of the elections. At the CCJ, the PPP/C, local stakeholders and the international community expect the court to rule that Guyana’s Court of Appeal does not have the jurisdiction to issue rulings on presidential elections. The PPP/C argued that the elections’ validity can only be challenged through an elections petition filed with Guyana’s High Court after a formal winner has been declared by GECOM. The many roadblocks APNU/AFC coalition party leaders have set up during this election cycle have decreased the credibility and trust in the APNU/AFC coalition. The APNU/AFC coalition has put its future in Guyana at risk. The international community and local stakeholders appear to have accepted the PPP/C party as the winner of the elections, with the party securing the majority of votes cast in the general election. The APNU/AFC will become the country’s formal Opposition, with 31 of 65 parliamentary seats. Therefore, the strength of Guyana’s democratic will, in part, rely on the APNU+AFC coalition’s ability to become a credible and trustworthy opposition. However, this possibility is becoming less likely, as specific leaders within the APNU+AFC coalition erode the trust between themselves and the PPP/C, as well as with Guyana’s international and regional partners. Both the PPP/C and the APNU/AFC dominate Guyana’s political system, drawing support from the majority of the population. A breakdown in trust would further divide the country, since trust is integral for Guyana going forward. The country faces numerous challenges, including those associated with oil wealth and the constitutional changes needed to overhaul the elections process. Regardless of how we may all feel, this new uncertainty in Guyana now threatens to delay and potentially limit future investments in a resource that has the potential to pour billions into Guyana’s economy in the aftermath of these elections. A transparent and steady transition process is critical to maintaining growth and signalling to international investors that Guyana is a reliable partner, which would encourage them to come on board and invest immediately in Guyana. Sincerely, D. Adams

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

Coalition has boxed itself into a corner with its lies Dear Editor,

Policy of pre-retirement J leave should be applied across the board Dear Editor,

avid Granger, still squatting in the President's Office, last week instructed the Chief of Staff of the GDF (Army), Brigadier Patrick West, to proceed on pre-retirement leave. Brigadier West will reach retirement age next year, but has accumulated nine months of deferred annual leave to cover all remaining time on the job. This week, in accordance with policy Mr. Granger himself insisted on when he assumed the Presidency in 2015, Mr. Granger instructed the Chief of Staff to immediately embark on his pre-retirement leave, effectively ending his tenure as Chief of Staff. By itself, this is innocuous, consistent with policy. Still, given that a new President is soon to be sworn in, and a new government, the practice is that the new President would have been the best person to effect this movement and to select the person to act as the Chief of Staff until the time for the formal installation of a new Chief of Staff. But this diversion from best-practice is a story for another time. The same exact circumstances exist with the Police Commissioner, Mr. Leslie James, who will attain retirement age early next year. Like Brigadier West, Mr. James has accumulated more deferred annual leave (ten months) than the time left before his retirement. He should have proceeded on pre-retirement leave several months ago, if the policy Mr. Granger insisted on in 2015 was applied. On Tuesday (June 30), Mr. Ramjattan, the squatter in the Ministry of Public Security, confessed he has no idea why Mr. James had still not proceeded on pre-retirement leave. Once a reporter posted this story, Ramjattan, as usual, denied he said such things. Regardless, the continued presence of Mr. James on the job is not in accordance with policy, the same policy Mr. Granger used to instruct the Chief of Staff of the GDF to immediately proceed on pre-retirement leave. The same set of circumstances apply to the Deputy Police Commissioner, Ms. Maxine Graham. She has accumulated six months deferred annual leave, more time than time left for her retirement. She is still on the job. The policy that was applied so effectively by David Granger in the case of Brigadier West has not been applied for the two most senior officers in the Guyana Police Force. Given West was so quickly vanquished, why the special and differential treatment for James and Graham? Why has Granger acted so resolutely when it comes to Brigadier West of the GDF, but apply a different set of lens, for the Guyana Police Force? Granger, uncharacteristically, responded rather quickly to this question. He has indicated that the two most senior officers of the police force are engaged in an ongoing operation related

to the March 2 elections and it is not an appropriate time for them to proceed on pre-retirement leave. This explanation leaves more questions than answers. If the reason specified by Mr. Granger is an ongoing special operation, how come the squatter Ramjattan is unaware? Inquiring Guyanese minds are now busy with rampant speculation, given the special and differential application of the pre-retirement policy, particularly in the midst of a barefaced attempt to thief the March 2 elections. It is not unreasonable for most Guyanese to think something is seriously amiss. It comes at a time when it was reported that two weekends ago, Mr. Granger called in the Chief of Staff of the Army for a meeting at Granger's home. There was no information as to the nature of that meeting. It comes at a time, more sinisterly, when Mr. Granger staged a radio show in which he made pellucid he expects GECOM to use Lowenfield's bogus report to declare him the winner. That Mr. Granger so unequivocally informed the nation only Lowenfield's tabulation must be considered for the swearing in of the President lead most Guyanese and other stakeholders outside of Guyana to believe Granger will stage a coup d'état in our country, through a thieving of the elections. Since Granger's pronouncements, two things derailed Granger's last weekend swearing in plan. The CCJ set a date for its decision on July 8. More significantly, the US Secretary of State (Foreign Affairs Minister) announced he has instructed his staff to prepare sanctions against those who are trying to thief Guyana's elections. Mr. Pompeo's declaration that the US has shifted gears from threatening sanction to implementing a sanction regime has caused Mr. Granger to sober up a little and again fall back on his posture he is awaiting a declaration from GECOM. Mr. Granger's hypocrisy relating to the March 2 elections leave too many Guyanese suspicious of the differential actions taken with the Heads of the army and the police. The election shenanigans have led the majority of Guyanese to see sinister motives, thinking maybe Mr. Granger did not have confidence in Brigadier West's willingness to go along with any planned illegal occupation of the government, disregarding the elections results. Therefore, the policy of pre-retirement leave only applied to him and not other security officials. It is also unfair on both the Police Commissioner and his deputy because it gives the impression that both are willing to go along with Granger's illegal path. Sincerely, Dr. Leslie Ramsammy

ust before the leader of the APNU/AFC Coalition, David Granger. made his impromptu speech to his supporters who had gathered outside of State House, on the afternoon of July 8,2020, an instruction to him was shouted out by one of those gathered. The instruction was- “say what we want hear, not what you want to say”. That instruction encapsulates perfectly the dilemma that the Coalition has found itself in. They have peddled so many lies and inconsistencies to their supporters, that their whole narrative has become confusing. It has now reached the point where the supporters are instructing the leaders what to say, as nothing less will suffice. The Coalition have alienated themselves

from the entire world. They have fooled their supporters and now will find it hard to walk back the many untruths they have peddled; effectively boxing themselves into a corner where they are forced to do whatever they can to cling onto their few supporters. For the APNU+AFC Coalition to tell the truth will mean, almost certainly, their demise. This fact is something the majority of Guyana has seemingly accepted. I do not envy their position, but they only have themselves to blame. Being honest with their supporters since the evening of March 2, 2020 would have preserved some of their credibility, alas it is now too late. Yours truly, Sherwyn Greaves

Nagamootoo continues to deny the truth Dear Editor,

t is now more than four months after the March 2 elections in Guyana and we are yet to have the correct declaration. Amidst all of the contentions and controversies, many persons are pushing the narrative that the coalition won the elections. One such person, the de facto Prime Minister, Moses Nagamootoo, is consistent in his belief that the PPP committed massive fraud at these elections. It is interesting to note that there has been no evidence to support the accusations of Nagamootoo. However, Nagamootoo keeps peddling these untruths in the hope that the more he tells a lie, it will be believable. I want to remind Nagamootoo of the words of the Danish philosopher, Soren Kierkegaard: “There are two ways to be fooled. One way is to believe what isn’t true; The other is to refuse to believe what is true.” Mr Nagamootoo is guilty of the above. He conveniently ignores the Caricom-supervised recount results which show that the coalition lost the elections by more than 15,000 votes. In his column, “My Turn, Bungled Ballot Boxes,” Guyana Chronicle (2020-06-07), Mr Nagamootoo wrote, “ As I see it, the Election Commission has the results of the ten electoral districts which show the APNU/ AFC coalition has won by a narrow margin.” Seriously, Mr Nagamootoo? You and your coalition members have refused to present your SoPs for verification by the GECOM and the other contesting parties. You are also

willing to tow the coalition line and accept the fraudulent declarations by Mr Mingo and Mr Llowenfield. With respect to Mr Mingo’s declarations, the former Jamaican Prime Minister, Mr Bruce Golding, had this to say at an OAS conference: “And permit me here to pause to make a comment. I have never seen a more transparent effort to steal the results of an election…You know it takes an extraordinary and courageous mind to present such fictitious numbers when such a sturdy paper trail exists.” Mr Nagamootoo, Mingo’s horrendous act of trying to falsify the Region Four numbers in order to steal the elections for the coalition is the singularly most conspicuous act of fraud in the 2020 Guyana elections. Mr Nagamootoo, you also have an extraordinary and courageous mind to, as Kierkegaard said, “believe what is untrue.” You concluded the above column being referred to with the words, “We can revisit our mistakes and we can correct them before they create schisms that we should be unable to heal, now or in the near future.” Yes, Mr Nagamootoo, you can salvage some dignity by telling your coalition that they have lost elections or you can continue to peddle your untruths with which you will be consigned to the dustbins of Guyanese political history with reference to you being a maybe, a mere footnote. The choice is yours. Sincerely, M. Persaud

PPP calls on ERC to investigate, act in complaint about racially divisive comments

letter was dispatched to the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC) by the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C), complaining about divisive remarks made by the PNCled APNU+AFC Coalition’s prime ministerial candidate, Khemraj Ramjattan. Signed by PPP/C rep, Anil Nandlall, the letter called for an investigation and action by the ERC. The letter, dated July 2, 2020, said, “The PPP/C hereby lodges a complaint against Mr. Khemraj Ramjattan. Mr. Ramjattan, speaking on a live television program titled Morning

Edition, broadcast on CCN TV6 in Trinidad and Tobago, today, June 2, 2020, published the following words: ‘Black People 0000 sot oil money you have to have East Indians doing that’. Mr. Ramjattan alleged that these words were part of political advertisements published in Guyana. “It is clear that these words were intended and are capable of inciting racial hostilities amongst the people of Guyana, in particular between Indo and Afro-Guyanese, may constitute an offence under the Racial Hostility Act, Chapter 23:01, Laws of Guyana,

and are not protected by Article 146 of the Constitution of Guyana which guarantees freedom of expression and free speech, excepting, inter alia, ‘expressions, in whatever form, capable of exciting hostility against any person or class of persons’. “In the circumstances, we request that the Commission launches an investigation of this complaint and take such actions that it considers necessary and appropriate against Mr. Ramjattan, immediately.” The ERC has not proffered a public response to the matter.

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

[The following is a publication by Dr. Cheddi Jagan made on June 23, 1996]

STRAIGHT TALK…

The ideological/political struggle: Opportunism is the PNC’s hallmark By Cheddi Jagan

ace/ethnicity, class, religion and ideology influence Guyana's cultural development and determine its political behaviour. The PNC has always exploited race and ideology. Once again, it is playing the race/ideology card. In its most recent outburst, it referred to Cheddi Jagan's "publicly declared adherence to outmoded Marxist/ Leninist ideology and by his pursuit of a rabid policy of racism, political victimization and hostility to private investment, both foreign and local." The PNC is bereft of proper analysis and understanding of philosophy and ideology, of theory and practice. It has failed to understand that in the industrially-developed capitalist states, the major contradiction is between the capitalist class and the working class where attempts are being made to solve the deep and on-going socio-economic crisis at the expense of the working people. On the other hand, the major problem of the developing states is survival in this era of economic globalization and liberalization. Consequently, all classes and strata, all social partners, capital and labour must cooperate for national security, peace, social progress and sustainable human development. It is this understanding which has firstly brought about a PPP/Civic alliance; and secondly, for the PPP/ Civic administration to work for a capital/government/ labour social contract, for the private sector to play the role as the engine of economic growth and, for labour to ensure growth with social justice and ecological preservation.. FABRICATIONS The PNC has a Machiavellian political approach and an eclectic ideological position. When in the PPP in the 1950-54 period, L F S Burnham took a strong national liberation position and attacked those who raised the anti-communist red-herring. McCarthyism was then a strident force in the West. The PPP Government was attacked in October 1953 for attempting to “establish a

communist state.” How that impossible task was done in a colonial environment at that time was not spelled out. These were fabricated charges and major news media pointed this out. The Times of India stated: “In a laboriously prepared charge sheet the British Government has not been able to point to a single act of violence of the part of any member of the People’ Progressive party…the people of this country who remember how, not long ago, the leaders of the national movement were denounced by the British Government as Japanese agents, know what to make of these charges.” Ralph Champion, Daily Mirror correspondent, who was the first to arrive in British Guiana during the crisis wrote on Wednesday, October 7, from Georgetown: “I was the first British newspaperman to arrive in this “crisis” colony and when I flew in yesterday, I was greeted with amazement. There seemed to be little idea that there was a crisis over alleged moves by the government’s People’s Progressive Party to convert the colony into a Red Republic.” Another British Newspaper, the Daily Mail, on October 7, reported: “Mr. Whittingham, the deputy police commissioner in British Guiana, sounded calm and unperturbed today as he spoke over the radio-telephone from the colony’s capital, Georgetown and said, ‘There are no demonstrations, there is no general strike, there is nothing abnormal happening here whatsoever’. I told him of reports that Communists workers were demonstrating around the Parliament Buildings. Mr. Whittingham said, ‘There have been no demonstrations and trouble whatsoever’. The Times of October 21, said: “Thoughtful observers feel that unless the show of force is justified by the subsequent revelation of an imminent plot it might well alienate public opinion.” WHITE PAPER It must be noted that the British Government published a White Paper on the suspension of the Constitution, but even this did not provide any further evidence. But this too was exposed by yet another recognized media house.

The Times of October 21 said: “The ‘Communist Plot’ is not exposed in the White Paper with clarity and completeness that many in the country expected.” DIALECTICS Later, after PPP victories in 1957 and 1961, it was charged that Guyana would become a second Cuba and that the PPP planned to establish a Marxist-Leninist state based on the Soviet/Chinese/ Cuban model – one party, concentration of economic power in the state with little if any role for the private sector. What was not noted was that in those socialist states, political power had come from violent revolution, from “the barrel of a gun”; whereas, in British Guiana, the PPP contested in a multi-party system and won three consecutive elections – all of this despite vicious propaganda and harassment. The different approach and practices of the PPP, in a totally different cultural/ constitutional environment, was noted, in the context of the then American hysteria about communism, by Tory MP and Colonial Secretary, Ian Macleod, who had chaired the 1960 Constitutional Conference in London in 1960, which rejected the proportional representation system of voting. In a debate in the House of Commons in June 1964, Macleod said: “There is an irony we all recognize in the fact that America is urging us all over the world towards colonial freedom except where it approaches their own doorstep. When I was last in America, I discussed with many people, including President Kennedy, this particular question which weighs anxiously on their minds; I myself think their fears (about Dr Jagan) are exaggerated. The American attitude seems dangerous because in my experience if you put off independence, you may fear you may get a left-wing government, the most likely thing to happen is that you will get a government even further to the left.” DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PRACTICE AND THEORETICAL PRINCIPLES Although sharing the same theoretical/ideological principles, the PPP’s practice (Turn to page 10)

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

More workers on the breadline ‒ Guyana Goldfields moves forward with third phase of layoffs

he local subsidiary of the Guyana Goldfields Limited, Aurora Gold Mines (AGM), has announced the third phase of its workforce reduction, which will see more persons being terminated in the coming days. The AGM Director of People and Culture, Emma Geist, issued a circular dated June 9, 2020 to all employees, indicating that the third phase of termination comes as the company transitions from open-pit mining to underground mining at the Aurora mine site. “Following our announcements about transitioning from open pit mining to underground mining at our Aurora mine site and the

interruption this will cause in our operations for an undetermined period, we will now proceed with the third phase of our workforce reduction plan,” Geist informed. This third phase is said to conclude the workforce reduction process. It will be split into two phases – one commencing from July 10, and the other slated for the end of July. The outline of the process is identical to that of the previous phases: employees who would be part of this workforce reduction would be contacted by HR to report to the office in Georgetown to get their final papers. “Employees who will be part of this workforce reduction

initiative while being at site will be informed by their supervisors to report to the HR office on Friday morning, before they fly back from Aurora to Ogle Airport, to get their final papers. Extra flights have been scheduled to depart Aurora on Friday, July 10, 2020 and flight manifests will be released,” the circular indicated. A final payout will be deposited into the bank accounts of the affected employees no later than July 20, 2020. It caps a tumultuous year for the company, which had made moves to sell its operations off to fellow Canadian mining company Silvercorp Metals last month. However,

a Chinese company managed to acquire the large-scale gold mining company for some Cdn$323 million in what turned out to be the better offer. Meanwhile, Zijin Mining Group Co, a leading global mining company specialising in gold, copper, zinc, and other mineral resource exploration and development, bettered the purchasing price and conditions stipulated by the Canadian company. When the operations resume, the new company will take over and employees will be transferred under new management. “We would also like to inform you that once the ownership transfers to Zijin and the COVID-19 pandemic allows their leadership to visit the mine site, they

plan to restart the open-pit mining as soon as possible. Unfortunately, we cannot predict when that will happen, nor can we predict when the Government will open the airports to allow travel at this time.” Zijin Chairman Chen Jinghe last month expressed optimism at the prospects that the acquisition of the Aurora mining operations present. “Guyana Goldfields’ management team has dedicated tremendous effort and made significant contributions in progressing the Aurora Gold Mine, and we look forward to advancing and developing the next phase of the mine. We believe that the Aurora mine is a high-quality gold asset with significant upside potential, which we believe

will be highly complementary to Zijin’s existing mining asset portfolio,” he said. The Chinese company has committed to “continuing to operate in a safe, sustainable, and responsible manner”, and says that it looks forward to “working closely with the Government of Guyana, the local communities, and all other stakeholders to deliver a first-class operation that will significantly benefit the regional economy”. It was noted that the agreement will be subject to the approval of 66.66 per cent of votes cast by shareholders of Guyana Goldfields at an annual and special meeting of Guyana Goldfields shareholders expected to be held by July 31, 2020.

Court awards $10M to West Berbice cash crop farmers T he High Court awarded over $10 million relief to three cash crop farmers of Region Five (Mahaica-Berbice) in a lawsuit they had filed back in September 2018 against Regional Executive Officer (REO), Ovid Morrison, who had maliciously bulldozed their farmlands and cut down their crops. The judgement was handed down by High Court Judge, Justice Simone Ramlall, last month. The three claimants – Krishna Sewlall, Kristopher Sewnarine and Kaleel Jameer – had retained Attorney-at-Law Anil Nandlall to approach the court seeking over $10 million in damages for what they contended was the unlawful destruction of their property. The farmers, along with dozens of others, are occupying land in the Tract 3 X of Block 1A and Tract Y portion of Plantation of Naarstigheid, being part of Bath, West Coast Berbice (WCB). They were granted a two-year lease for 1.4 acres in March 2000 under the Social Impact Amelioration Project (SIMAP) for largescale farming. Upon the expiration of the two-year lease, the claimants continued to cultivate the land with the permission of the Regional Democratic Council (RDC),

which owned the lands. However, in October 2016, REO Morrison had demanded that some 50 farmers, including the three claimants, vacate the land and threatened to bulldoze their crops and forcibly eject them. The farmers complained to the Chairman of the RDC who, by letter dated March 21, 2018, instructed the REO to refrain from interfering with the farmers’ occupation of the land. Upon the claimants’ refusal to vacate, Morrison went ahead to enter the land and bulldozed their crops and structures in April and August 2018. During the trial held, the RDC Chairman, Vickchand Ramphal, had testified on behalf of the claimants, confirming their occupation and cultivation of the land. He further told the court that he had written the REO instructing him to desist from dispossessing the farmers or damaging their crops, and advising him that his actions were not grounded in any RDC decision. As such, in her decision, Justice Ramlall accepted the claimants’ evidence of the history and circumstances surrounding their occupation and cultivation of the land in question. “Given this evidence and

there being none to the contrary, the defendant had no authority to evict the claimants from the land. The defendant is merely the Chief Administrative Officer of the RDC. There is no evidence that he was acting pursuant to the specific or general direction of the RDC (Section 77 (3) of the Municipal and District Councils Act (“the Act”)) neither was he acting pursuant to any power or duty conferred upon or assigned to him by Part 1 of the Sixth Schedule of the Act or any other law. He was acting ultra vires his powers and as such his interference with the claimants’ occupation of land was unlawful. The defendant is therefore personally liable to the claimants for damages for trespass,” the High Court Judge ruled. According to Justice Ramlall, the claimants have been in occupation of, cultivating and developing the land with the RDC’s permission and their position is that of mere licensees who are entitled to remain on the land until their licence is validly terminated by the RDC. To this end, the Judge did note, however, that the farmers acquired no proprietary rights in the land. She further ruled given that a bare licence can be withdrawn at any time by the licensor without any

prescribed notice (provided that the licensee is given reasonable time to leave) it is now for the RDC to determine whether it wishes to determine the claimants’ licence. Nevertheless, in addition to the financial relief, she granted all four orders sought by the farmers. These include a declaration that the claimants are entitled to remain in possession and occupation of the portion of land at Plantation of Naarstigheid, Bath, WCB – with buildings and erections thereon unless and until their licence is terminated by the Mahaica-Berbice RDC.

Another declaration was granted to state that the REO’s interference with the claimants’ possession and occupation of the said land in the months of April and August 2018 constitutes trespass by him. The third declaration states that the removal of the structures, fixtures, trees, crops and plants on the said land by the REO, his servants, representatives, officers and/or agents collectively and individually was illegal. Fourth and finally, the Judge also granted an injunction restraining the REO by himself, his servants, rep-

resentatives, officers and/or agents collectively and individually and each and every one of them from entering or remaining, occupying, farming, bulldozing the land or in any manner whatsoever interfering with the claimants’ quiet and peaceful use, occupation and enjoyment of the said land. With regards to the relief, Justice Ramlall awarded special damages to the tune of $5,374,000 (the sum sought) to the three farmers. In addition, they were given general damages in the nominal sum of $100,000 each for trespass along with another $200,000 in costs.

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

Still no final declaration United Nations calls for results of election results after declaration “as soon as possible” meeting adjourned July 11th over 130 days ‒toGECOM T

he three-hour long meeting of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) on Friday (July 10, 2020) ended without a final declaration of election results, over 130 days now since Guyanese went to the polls on March 2, 2020. At the meeting, the Chief Elections Officer (CEO), Keith Lowenfield, failed to provide his final report, using numbers from the Certificates of Recount, as instructed. The meeting was adjourned to Saturday (July 11, 2020) at 11:00hours (11:00AM). The GECOM Chair, retired Justice Claudette Singh, has since issued another letter to Lowenfield, instructing him, again, to provide a report using the results of the national recount. “You are accordingly advised that my letter dated July 9, 2020 stands,” Singh said in her letter dated July 10, 2020. Lowenfield is now expected to provide his report to GECOM on July 11, 2020 by 11:00hours. This is the third time that the GECOM Chair has issued the same instructions to Lowenfield. He has failed to comply twice before. People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) nominated GECOM Commissioner, Bibi Shadick, in comments on the issue said, “We cannot have one person holding up this country; right now that is what is happening….we arrived at a meeting to be confronted with a letter written by the Chief Elections Officer….he said he didn’t understand and he was seeking to quote the CCJ judgement and misquoted the CCJ.

“….after all the confusion the decision was taken that the Chairman would go and write him further to say that what he asking for doesn’t have any relevance to what he asked him to do…while the Chairman is inside getting the letter drafted, the CEO walks out, informs someone that he had a death threat and he left the building. And that was it…. everybody understood what the Chairman left to do…

she could not give him the letter because he left the building…she is sending that letter to him.” According to Shadick, the GECOM insisted that any questions about the elections should be dealt with in the High Court by way of an elections petition – as made clear by in the judgement of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) on July 8, 2020. [SEE RELATED REPORTING ON PAGES 17, 18]

L.F.S. Burnham’s ideological eclectism and opportunism became more pronounced after his defeat at the 1957 and 1961 elections. He them somersaulted and became and anti-Cuban, anti-communist witch-hunter. Then again, he turned, in the mid-70’s and said that the PNC’s ideas were based on Marx, Engles and Lenin. Burnham postulated after the break of the PNC/PPP talks in 1976 that the PNC were the “Bolsheviks” (genuine revolutionaries) and the PPP were the “Mensheviks” (opportunist/ revisionists). During all that time, Desmond Hoyte held im-

portant positions in the PNC party and government and was credited with drafting the 1980 Constitution. Now, he is peddling, once again, anti-communist propaganda. The PNC ideological eclectism has prevented them from viewing reality scientifically and dialectically and to take a firm and principled political position. Opportunism is its hallmark. To its credit, the PPP has not made any serious mistakes in its political practice, its strategy and tactics. This is why it had won the confidence of the Guyanese people and maintains it.

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres

than four months. “The Secretary-General calls on all political leaders and their supporters to recognize and accept the final official results and refrain

from any act or statement that may fuel tensions or incite violence.” The UN is the latest international body to make such a call.

Reps of Diplomatic Corps meet with new Army Chief of Staff

The ideological/political struggle: Opportunism is the... (From page 8) was different, not only at the political, but also at the economic, level. In 1994, Yesu Persaud, former Chairman of the Private Sector Commission (PSC) and the Caribbean Association of Industry and Commerce (CAIC), said: “After many years of dormancy the local manufacturing sector is beginning to show signs of revival.” Recently, the PSC reported that over US$131M had been invested by local companies in 1995. And it works closely with the Government on a regular consultative basis; so do its constituents.

he United Nations has called on March 2, 2020 General and Regional Election process to be concluded, via the declaration of final results “as soon as possible”, so as to allow the country to move forward. In a comment on Friday (July 10, 2020), the UN said, “The Secretary-General (António Guterres) takes note of the 8 July ruling of the Caribbean Court of Justice, as final instance. “He stresses the importance of announcing final official results of the 2 March general and regional elections to the Guyanese people as soon as possible to end an impasse that has lasted more

iplomats of the United States, United Kingdom (UK), Canada and the European Union (EU) met with the newly appointed Chief-of-Staff of the GDF, Brigadier Godfrey Bess on Friday (July 10, 2020). And he underscored that the Force has an apolitical stance and abides by its role in the Constitution of Guyana. In a short statement, the army said Bess “reiterated the apolitical nature and posture of the Guyana Defence Force.” Brigadier Bess met with the US Ambassador Sarah Ann Lynch; British High Commissioner Greg Quinn; Canadian High Commissioner Lilian Chatterjee; and EU Ambassador Fernando Ponz-Canto at the GDF

Headquarters, Base Camp Ayanganna. The new army Chief of Staff was elevated to the station of Brigadier and received his Instruments of Commission for his new posting on July 1, 2020. On that occasion, when pressed on questions about whether the army, under his control, would support an undemocratically elected Government in Guyana, he had said, “We (were) trained to support the democratically elected Government of the day based on our constitution, and that we will continue to do…The Guyana Defence Force is a professional organization, and we will stick to the Constitution of Guyana.” Bess, who started his military career in 1990 served in

Command, Administrative, Staff and Training appointments throughout the GDF. He has been serving as Quarter Master General since January 1, 2018, and has been responsible for ensuring that the GDF is well resourced to carry out its mandate in any terrain. Bess has received military training from the Colonel Ulric Pilgrim Officer Cadet School – Guyana, the United States of America Military Police School – Alabama, the Caribbean Junior Command and Staff School – Jamaica and the Shrivenham Defence College, United Kingdom. He is the holder of a Bachelor of Social Science Degree in Business Management and Level Two Association of Chartered Certified Accountants.

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

Fight for democracy demands

fter over 129 days – since Guyanese went to the polls on March 2, 2020 – the elections debacle, fueled by the refusal of the APNU+AFC Coalition

to concede defeat, persists. This is despite the fact that the national recount exercise indicates clearly that the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) secured the

KESHINI ROOPLALL (NDC CHAIR) said: “During this 2020 elections fiasco I frequently reflect on the quote by Martin Luther King Jr. He had said that, ‘Freedom is never given voluntarily by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed’. We have seen all sort of machinations by the APNU+AFC Coalition, as well as from compromised GECOM Secretariat staffers, in an effort to delay the inevitable. Through it all, there struggle has persisted to ensure that every vote is counted and the electorate is not disenfranchised. The process has been long and hard. “What we are clear on is that the abuses we have seen in the past four months must never be allowed to reoccur. The people’s power, evidenced through the ballot, cannot be abused and any such effort must never be allowed. “We are also clear on the fact that Guyana has a long way to go. And we can only do that together. Guyanese must unite for The progress of this beautiful land .May peace be onto all Guyanese. The struggle is long but we will win. Democracy must prevail.” DEVINA PERSAUD (SUPERVISOR) said: “It is said that ‘democracy dies with silence and require an eternal vigilance to thrive’ and the last four-plus months shows that this is true. “If we as a people had remained silent, the democratic will of the people would have been undermined. The power of the people is what holds leaders accountable. “The March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections reminded us not only about our rights as a people, but also reminded us about our responsibility to remain vigilant, among other things, to ensure that our country remains on a democratic path.”

majority vote and in the face of local, regional and international pressure for the will of the Guyanese people to prevail. Amid this, the Mirror

Newspaper questioned the important lessons that were learnt over the past four-plus months. The consensus was the fight for democracy never stops, more so because

MICHAEL YOUNGE (FREELANCE WRITER) said: “The one lesson that is clear after over four months is that the will of the people must never be underestimated. “The people using each tier of the electoral system guarded the ballot boxes from the place of poll until each vote is counted and declared for the party of choice. Added to that, they went through tumultuous challenge to ensure that the right declaration is made and no one is disenfranchised. “The right to vote and to have the vote counted is sacrosanct. Guyanese demonstrated by their actions that democracy is alive – even as we need to continue to bolster our democratic gains – and well even in the poorest part of the world. Their patience is testimony to their law abiding nature, which must be lauded.” ARIANNA SEERAJ (INTERN) said: “After witnessing APNU+AFC Coalition’s flagrant attempt to rig the 2020 elections (something I never would have thought I would have experienced in my lifetime), I can surely say that Guyanese have learnt that not all politicians can be trusted. “We have also learnt to always be vigilant when it comes to our democratic rights, as some will not hesitate to undermine these rights, the moment we become negligent and complacent. “I think Guyanese would have also painfully learnt that the incumbent de facto administration really does not have our best interests at heart, as it opted watch our country suffer over the past few months, rather than put Guyana and the Guyanese people first and accept defeat, in order to allow Guyana to move forward. “Ultimately though, I believe that the most important lesson to be learnt is that we should always persevere through our hardships and never give up fighting for what is right.”

the destruction of democratic gain is done little by little, almost unnoticeably, if a nation’s people are not vigilant. Further, it was stressed

that in the face of threats against democracy, the struggle may be long and hard, but the will of the Guyanese people will prevail in the end.

MAHESH RAMDEO (MUNICIPAL MANAGER – CAPITAL PROJECTS) said: “The aftermath of the 2020 elections highlighted that our democracy is fragile and that we must continue to protect the gains made, as we work to strengthen it. “For the past 120-plus days, our democracy has been under attack. It still is. As robust as our elections process was, these 2020 elections showed that we have much work to do, to increase transparency and to thwart any future attempts to subvert the will of the people. That means we need to revamp GECOM, and to hold accountable those who tried to subvert the will of the people. “This year, we celebrated our 54th year of independence. We are not a young country. We are supposed to be a maturing country. Guyana is not some third rate, banana republic, where stealing an election is the norm. I am amazed that some tried to do just that. What took place over the past four months must not happen again; never again. We deserve better.” DWAYNE ADAMS (BUSINESSMAN) said: “The struggle to protect each vote and to have each vote counted has most definitely taught Guyanese the true value of our vote. “We have a right to vote, to have the freedom to choose our leaders, and the right to speak up for our beliefs. Our voices deserve to be heard and to have a say in deciding which party and which policies will determine the future of our families and country at large. Voting is a democratic right that should always be protected. “Although some may consider themselves trivial in the entire process of democracy in Guyana, it has taught us that one vote makes a big difference and has enough power to alter the direction of political influences and political stewardship in our country. We all have a say and this is conveyed through your ballot, so by disenfranchising one person, by not counting their ballot, you are taking away the voice of the future of our country.”

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

continued struggle, vigilance MALCOLM WATKINS (SUPPLY CHAIN PROFESSI ONAL) said: “Guyanese, especially the younger generation, have come to learn – in other cases have been reminded – that protecting our democracy demands struggle. Politics is closely woven into every fabric of our lives and as such, each one must be vigilant and stand up for democracy at every level. “This experience exposed the extreme lengths that some, calling themselves leader, are willing to go to maintain control over and steal our resources. At the end of the day, real power lies in the hands of the people and we have a responsibility and an obligation to future generations to use this power to hold those in leadership positions accountable. “What has also been made clear is the importance of a united Guyana, where we can work together and remove the fear of indifference, for a better future for all. As Martin Carter said ‘all are involved, all are consumed’ and what is at stake – our collective future progress – demands that we maintain a united front.”

GOMATI KHALICHARRAN (ACTIVIST) said: “March 5th 2020 will be a date in Guyana's history that will never be forgotten. This was the day when it was clear that our democracy had to be protected and we had to struggle together to ensure that this is done. We have all been reminded that that democracy must not be taken for granted and that there will always be individuals who will try to undermine democracy in our country. “I grew hearing about Burnham and rigged elections and what we all collectively experience can be comparative. No Guyanese citizen wished to be taken down an undemocratic road. Moving forward, we must continue to stand together and embody our national motto - One People One Nation One Destiny.”

AZAM ALLY (SOFTWARE ENGINEER) said: “The struggle to protect and have each vote counted has taught me a lot about our Constitution and judiciary. “From filing injunctions to appealing decisions, listening to legal submissions and judges' decisions, the past four months I am sure has taught many Guyanese about various legal processes. “In addition, a great deal of patience and persistence were needed by all citizens, especially those who were active in physically guarding ballot boxes, part of the recount process and in courts fighting for valid and credible declaration of these elections results.” VICKRAM BHARRAT (POLITICIAN) said: “In 1992, Cheddi Jagan said ‘Now is the time when we must all give a little more for our freedom, we must care a little more for our people, we must sacrifice a little more for the greater good of our Nation and her future’. Those were the words of the visionary, Father of the Nation Dr. Cheddi Jagan after the first free and fair elections, which was won by the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C). “The last year has shown the fragility of democracy and how it can be undermined by politicians who are power crazed, corrupt and hell-bent to stay in power by any means necessary, be it legal or not, with no concern or care for its people or country. “However, they must not and will not be allowed to undermine the will of the people and our Democracy. Our true leaders have stood firm and have weathered the storm of dictatorial rule and total disregard for the rule of law by the APNU/ AFC since 21st December, 2018. “This period has shown us how professional people can be easily influenced to compromise their integrity and reputation for personal gains by a corrupt Government. People who have sworn to uphold and protect the Constitution of our Country and to act without fear and favor are now utensils to rigging elections and keeping an illegal Government in power. “Also, the role of the International Community and other International Organizations can never be over emphasized in this fight to protect our Democracy. They have stood firm for what is right and to protect the will of the Guyanese people. And for this, Guyana owes them a depth of gratitude for their persistent calls for GECOM to make a declaration using the recount figures.”

ODAYSON ASHBY (PROSPECTOR) said: “In the 21st century despite of our religious beliefs, political choices ethnicity, what is clear is that together the power the people is much stronger than the people in power. “In the last 125-plus days, we have seen elements of dictatorship, electoral fraud and various attempts to suppress the will of the people. We have also seen that this will not be condoned or tolerated – not by the Guyanese people or democratic-minded nations regionally and internationally. “Guyanese have bonded together to let their voice be heard, in saying that they will not allow history to repeat itself by allowing the APNU + AFC Coalition to lead Guyana down an undemocratic path, as was done in previous years under the leadership of the PNC. For that, I can say, power to the people.”

NALINIE SINGH (CONSULTANT) said: “It is my ardent hope that the recent struggle to protect each vote and ensure each was/is counted has taught all my Guyanese brothers and sisters how fragile our democracy is. “It has been said that ‘No, democracy is not a fragile flower. Still, it needs cultivating. If the rest of this century is to witness the gradual growth of freedom and democratic ideals, we must take actions to assist the campaign for democracy’. This still holds true. “Guyanese in 1992 saw the first free and fair elections in our contemporary history. I was merely a toddler at this time. We have progressed in many ways since then, but to see the attempt to take us backward makes it clear that we must always remain vigilant. “A clear lesson for us all, given all that has happened since the close of polls on March 2, 2020, is that together we are stronger. We have seen Guyanese of all political identities coming out and speaking up in protection of our right for self-determination. Moving forward, this unity must be bolstered.”

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

Results from recount of votes from March 2, 2020 elections (Numbers based on the completed and signed Certificates of Recount as of June 9, 2020)

Comparison of votes secured by PPP/C and APNU+AFC

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

Positions from Freedom House this week (A look at the latest statements made by the People’s Progressive Party)

Basil Williams incites Lowenfield to violate the law

t is an established fact that Attorney General Basil Williams has not won a singular case of worth over the past 5 years. Indeed, many are of the view that the innumerable violations of the Constitution and the rule of law committed by the Coalition Government have been caused by or are a reflection of the type and quality of legal advice the Government receives from the Attorney General. Fresh in the nation’s memory is Williams’ forays in the press almost every day over the past week before Wednesday July 8, 2020, bellowing that the CCJ has no jurisdiction to hear and determine the appeal filed in the Eslyn David matter. As many would have noticed that he switched off his camera when the CCJ delivered its judgment as they tumbled his arguments, one after the other, upside down. Just a day after that ruling he again shamelessly misinterprets and misapplies the law in his purported legal advice to Keith Lowenfield hours after he was directed by the Guyana Elections Commission to prepare the statutory Report using the total votes as per the Certificates of Recount. Williams does this in spite of the CCJ’s ruling which previously declared

the CEO’s unilateral acts invalidating votes to be in violation of the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, the CCJ stating as follows: “[47] By the unnecessary insertion of the word “valid”, the Court of Appeal impliedly invited the CEO to engage, unilaterally, in a further and unlawful validation exercise unknown to and in clear tension with the existing, constitutionally anchored electoral laws. That further exercise, which the CEO was quick to embrace in breach of the Court of Appeal Stay of proceedings, also had the effect of facilitating a serious trespass on the exclusive jurisdiction of the High Court established by Article 163…” William’s clear intent is to attempt, once again, to incite and invite the Chief Election Officer to violate the law and commit another perversity. Williams’ conduct amounts to a clear defiance of and contempt for the many pronouncements that the Caribbean Court of Justice made only yesterday on identical issues. Needless to say, Williams’ conduct will be drawn to the Court’s attention for its action. Even at this late hour, Williams is still to comprehend that GECOM

is an autonomous constitutional institution insulated from political directions and influences of any type. His untutored advice is therefore constitutionally prohibited. Moreover, he has completely misunderstood and misinterpreted the legal relationship between the CEO and GECOM. This relationship is not a matter for speculation but explicitly set out in the law. Article 162 (1)(b) of the Constitution states that the Elections 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.” Consistent with 162(1)(a) and 162(1)(b), Section 18 of the Elections Law (Amendment) Act 2000 states: “The Chief Election Officer and the Commission of Registration shall notwithstanding

anything in any written law be subject to the direction and control of the Commission.” Additionally, Order 60/2020 states in pertinent part as follows: “15. For the avoidance of any doubt, the Chief Election Officer and every person appointed or authorized to perform any act or functions by virtue of this Order, are and shall remain subject to the general supervisory power of the Commission.” With the exception of Williams, it must be clear to every reader that the cumulative effect of Article 162(1)(b), Section 18 of the Elections Law (Amendment) Act 2000, and the provisions of Order 60/2020 is that the CEO is subject to the direction and control the Commission and enjoys no “independence” vis a vis the Commission. Therefore, Williams’ contention that Lowenfield can prepare a report of his own liking and not in accordance with the directions of GECOM is absolutely wrong. Under the Representation of the People Act and where there is there is no recount the CEO is always mandated by GECOM and bound to prepare his report based on the declarations of the ten returning officers. Those declarations

have been now replaced by the certificates of recount under Order 60/2020. Likewise, Lowenfield is bound to prepare his report based on those certificates and nothing else. Indeed, that is what he was directed to do by the Commission in its letter dated June 16, 2020. This direction has been reiterated in today’s letter. On multiple occasions throughout its judgment, the CCJ emphasised that the CEO cannot unilaterally prepare a report of his own but must at all times prepare the report in accordance with Section 96 of the Representation of the People Act, that is to say, based upon the total votes counted. For the avoidance of doubt and to clear up any confusion that the William’s may have caused, we refer to the following paragraphs of the Court’s judgment which dismissed Eslyn David’s application to restrain the CEO from complying with the direction of the GECOM Chair, and declared his previous report to have no effect: [45] Validity in this context means, and could only mean, those votes that, ex facie, are valid. The determination of such validity is a transparent exercise that weeds out of the process, for example, spoilt or rejected

ballots.48 This is an exercise conducted in the presence of, inter alia, the duly appointed candidates and counting agents of contesting parties. It is after such invalid votes are weeded out that the remaining “valid votes” count towards a determination of not only the members of the National Assembly but, incidentally as well, the various listed Presidential candidates. If the integrity of a ballot, or the manner in which a vote was procured, is questioned beyond this validation exercise, say because of some fundamental irregularity such as those alleged by Mr Harmon, then that would be a matter that must be pursued through Article 163 after the elections have been concluded. [46] At the point in the electoral process where Article 177(2)(b) is reached, there is no further need to reference “valid votes” because, subject to Article 163 (which is triggered by election petition after the election), the relevant validation process has already been completed. It was therefore unnecessary for the Court of Appeal majority to qualify “votes” in Article 177(2)(b) by inserting before it the adjective “valid” and, in any event, they (Turn to page 17)

APNU+AFC attacks on CCJ condemned

n March 2, 2020, General and Regional elections were held and the citizens of Guyana elected the Peoples’ Progressive Party/ Civic to form the next Government. Polling day activities were observed and certified to be free and fair by both local and international organisations. After attempts by Clairmont Mingo, a Returning Officer, to rig the election results by inflating the votes in favour of APNU/ AFC by 23,000 votes in district four, a recount of all the ballots was undertaken under a CARICOM brokered agreement. The ballots were recounted and the recount was observed again by a CARICOM team along with local and international observers, and certified to be free, fair and credible. The results of the recount re-confirmed the initial polling day results, establishing a victory for the PPP/C by over 15,000

votes, over APNU/AFC. Every international organization has called upon GECOM to use the recount results as the basis for the declaration of the final election results, including CARICOM, the OAS, the Commonwealth, the European Union and the ABC countries. The Chair of the Guyana Elections Commission, after a Commission meeting, directed the Chief Elections Officer to use the recount results as the basis for his statutory report to the Commission. Instead of following the directions given, the Chief Elections Officer, purportedly taking directions from a stayed Court of Appeal ruling, unilaterally invalidated over 115,000 votes, giving APNU/AFC a fraudulent victory. This prompted the then Chair of CARICOM, Prime Minister Mia Mottley, to ask “on what grounds and by what form of

executive fiat does the Chief Election Officer determine that he should invalidate 1 vote, far less over 115,000 votes when the votes were already certified as valid by officers of the Guyana Elections Commission in the presence of the political parties.” These matters are currently pending at the Caribbean Court of Justice for ruling on Wednesday, July 8, 2020. We note the most vulgar vilifications and sometimes ad hominem attacks upon every diplomatic mission, every government, every organization, every public personality and every institution that or who have exercised their right to express a critical and condemnatory view on the APNU/AFC’s and their agents’ attempts to rig the March 2, 2020 elections in Guyana. In today’s free and democratic society, where the world is seen as

one global village, it is a matter of significant public importance if democracy is under threat, moreover under siege, in any particular territory. Its condemnation is viewed almost as a duty by important public personalities, diplomatic missions, and rights’ organisations. Consistent with their approach, from the moment the case was filed at the CCJ, APNU/AFC’s abuse has been focused on the Court. The main plank upon which these attacks are based is an alleged “interference” with Guyana’s sovereignty. Nothing can be more absurd, ill-informed, and misconceived. It is common knowledge that entering into international arrangements and treaties and becoming a part of international organisations is not a limitation of sovereignty but an exercise of it. Guyana is a member of the Common-

wealth, the United Nations, the Organisation of American States and CARICOM, and through its obligations under various international treaties executed with these organisations, Guyana enjoined to practice and embrace democratic processes, including free and fair elections. Similarly, in 2004, Guyana signed on to a regional agreement legally establishing the Caribbean Court of Justice as its final appellate court, by an Act tabled by the PPP, supported by the PNC, which ultimately was unanimously passed. As a result, the Caribbean Court of Justice is no longer an organization extrinsic to the State of Guyana but it is intrinsic and indeed the apex tier of our judicial hierarchical structure. Therefore, the propaganda being peddled that a ruling of the CCJ will amount to

an interference in Guyana’s sovereignty is palpably erroneous. What is most offensive are the crass attempts by APNU/AFC’s leaders to influence and prejudice the outcome of the proceedings at the CCJ through their various public statements, letters, and advertisements placed throughout the region. Worse yet, they have launched an unprecedented attack on the independence of the Court and have gone as far as attempting to intimidate the judges by threatening the very survival of the Court, if the pending ruling is adverse to them. This must rank as the worst form of thuggery and intimidation aimed at the judiciary in the region. While we recognize that the Court will see these endeavours for what they are, we must register our rejection of them in the strongest possible way. (July 7, 2020)

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

CCJ sets aside ruling of Lowenfield must abide by Appeal Court, invalidates CCJ ruling, instructions of CEO’s June 23rd report GECOM Chair – Jagdeo

n a judgment delivered on Wednesday (July 8, 2020), the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) ruled that the judgment handed down by the Guyana Court of Appeal on 22 June 2020, which judgment was used by the Chief Election Officer (CEO) to invalidate over 100,000 votes, was invalid. The Court also decided that, as a consequence, the 23 June 2020 report of the Chief Election Officer was also invalid. The CCJ’s judgment was a unanimous one to which all the sitting Judges contributed. The case turned on whether an Application made to the Court of Appeal by Ms Eslyn David fell under Article 177(4) of the Guyana Constitution. That Article addresses questions as to the validity of an election of a President. Decisions of the Court of Appeal made under that Article are final and cannot be appealed to the CCJ. Ms David’s Application challenged the credibility of the recount, undertaken by the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), of

the votes cast at the elections held on 2 March 2020. Ms David claimed that GECOM had created a new and completely different legal regime by an Order it had issued (Order 60) authorising the recount and that GECOM had abdicated its responsibility to determine the election’s credibility. By a 2 -1 majority, the Court of Appeal had held that it had jurisdiction to entertain Ms David’s Application. The judges in the majority concluded that the words in Article 177(2)(b) of the Constitution, “if more votes are cast in favour…” must be interpreted to mean “if more valid votes are cast in favour”. Messrs Ali and Jagdeo applied to the CCJ for special leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal’s decision. The CCJ accepted that any decision made under Article 177(4) is final. The Court stated, however, that, as Guyana’s final court of appeal, it had the jurisdiction and a constitutional obligation to determine not only whether any such decision genuinely fell under that Article but, generally, to

ensure that the Constitution was being upheld. The Court determined that the Court of Appeal’s decision neither fell under Article 177(4) nor was it in conformity with the Constitution. The Court noted that there is no separate election of a President in Guyana as there used to be when Article 177(4) was originally introduced as Article 30(13) of the Constitution. A Presidential candidate is deemed to be President and so declared as a result of the election that takes place for members of the National Assembly. It was always intended that questions as to the validity of the election of a President could arise only after the members of the National Assembly had been elected and a Presidential candidate had been deemed and declared to be President. The Court stated that Ms David’s Application was therefore premature. Further, the questions raised by her fell under the exclusive jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 163 and not under the Court of Appeal’s jurisdiction un(Turn to page 18)

CCJ judgment has far reaching impacts for democracy – Ali

he Wednesday (July 8, 2020) ruling of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) was welcomed by the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) presidential candidate, Dr Irfaan Ali, who noted that the decision has far reaching impacts for democracy in Guyana. Ali, in brief comments on the issue, said, "I have listened keenly to the summary of the judgment of the Caribbean Court of Justice and salute not only the Court’s judgment but its commitment to free, fair and independent judgments. “No doubt the Court’s decision has a far reaching impact for democracy not only in Guyana, but in the entire Commonwealth. The Court has made Guyana and indeed the entire CARICOM proud in its swift delivery of a clear and cogent judgment.” “…I also thank our supporters and well wishers,

and a special thank you to our outstanding legal team who acted with considerable alacrity and professionalism in leading us to this victory and Guyana once more on the path of democracy." According to him, while the Court’s decision will be embraced by many, there are many others who will view the decision with disappointment by others. However, he stressed that democracy must prevail and the country must be allowed to move forward. Ali said, “We cannot ignore that Guyana faces significant economic and Health concerns which we all need to immediately address as a United country. Each and every one of us has a duty as Guyanese to move Guyana forward and I reaffirm my commitment to all of Guyana to ensure that we retake our place as a respected and celebrated democracy where each and every citizen, regardless

of background, can have an equal opportunity to enjoin all that our beautiful country has to offer.” The PPP/C presidential candidate also expressed his appreciation to all the political parties for their commitment to respect the legal process, their participation and legal representation. July 8, 2020 marked day 128 since Guyanese went to the polls on March 2, 2020 to vote in the General and Regional Elections.

he ruling from the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) paves the way for a swift declaration of final results from the March 2020 General and Regional Elections, according to People’s Progressive Party (PPP) General Secretary, Bharrat Jagdeo. In comments after the ruling on Wednesday (July 8, 2020), Jagdeo said, “We are extremely pleased that the Caribbean Court of Justice has set aside the decision of the Court of Appeal of Guyana…we believed from the beginning that the decision of the Court of Appeal was perverse. We argued that they lacked jurisdiction, that the Article that they used to infringe on other matters relating to the elections has nothing to do with the qualifications of the President, and therefore they were acting outside of their jurisdiction. Today (Wednesday) we’re being vindicated in the sense that the Court of Appeal acted in excess of its declaration.”

CCJ CASE In a case brought by Eslyn David, the Guyana Court of Appeal on June 22, 2020 addressed its decisions to two issues: one, whether it had jurisdiction; and two, an interpretation of the words “more votes” that are used in Article 177 (2) (b) of the Constitution of Guyana. The Appeal Court ruled that the use of the words “more votes” means “more valid votes” cast in an election. And it ruled that it had jurisdiction to hear what is basically a "disguised Elections petition" that should be heard in the High Court after final declaration is made. The People’s Progressive Party/ Civic’s (PPP/C) Irfaan Ali and Bharat Jagdeo appealed the Court of Appeal’s ruling on the issue of jurisdiction at the Caribbean Court of Justice. As such, the four core issues before the CCJ are: 1. Firstly, whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to entertain the application that was made to it. 2. Secondly, if the Court of Appeal lacked such jurisdiction, what is the consequence of this in relation to the proposed appeal to the CCJ. 3. Thirdly, if the Court of Appeal had rightly assumed jurisdiction, what is the con-

sequence of that in relation to the proposed appeal to the CCJ. 4. And fourthly, if the Court of Appeal rightly assumed jurisdiction, and it exceeded its jurisdiction, what is the consequence of that in relation to the proposed appeal to the CCJ. The respondents in the case before the CCJ are the Chair of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), the Guyana Elections Commission, the Attorney General, Mark France, Daniel Josh Kanhai, Lennox Shuman, Shazam Ally and Abedid Kindy Ali, as well as the Chief Elections Officer, Keith Lowenfield. In its ruling, the CCJ ruled that the Appeal Court did not have jurisdiction in the matter and it ruled that the June 23rd report of the Chief Elections Officer was invalid.

CEO’S JUNE 23RD REPORT On the ruling regarding Lowenfield’s report, Jagdeo said, “We are extremely pleased that they (CCJ) also set aside Lowenfield’s report that had fraudulently disenfranchised over 115,000 persons. But in doing so, the President of the Court, reading out part of a summary of a unanimous decision, he pointed out how Lowenfield had acted unlawfully. “The CEO is bound… he needs to prepare the report in accordance with the instructions given to him by the Chair of GECOM, which is to use the recount data which shows a victory for the PPP/C. The CEO has clear guidance now, let us see if he will continue to act unlawfully or in accordance with the guidance of the CCJ, a superior court.” The GECOM Chairperson, on June 16, 2020, wrote Lowenfield, instructing him to prepare his final report based on the results of the recently concluded National Recount, which lasted for over 30 days at the Arthur Chung Convention Centre (ACCC). “Pursuant to Article 177 (2) (b) of the Constitution and Section 96 of the Representation of the People Act, you are hereby requested to prepare and submit your report by 13:00 hrs on June 18th, 2020 using the results of the recount for consideration by the commission,” Singh wrote in her

letter to Lowenfield. However, citing the June 22, 2020 decision of the Appeal Court, Lowenfield’s June 23rd report invalidated over 115,000 of the 460,352 votes that were deemed valid by the national recount process, which ended on June 9, 2020. The Chief Elections Officer claimed that 344,508 votes were valid at the general level and 343,968 votes were valid at the regional level. According to Lowenfield’s new numbers: 1. APNU+AFC Coalition – 171,825 votes at the general elections; 170,914 votes at the regional elections 2. PPP/C – 166,343 votes at the general elections; 167,257 votes at the regional elections. Based on these numbers, Lowenfield have the electoral victory to the APNU+AFC Coalition with 33 seats in the National Assembly, while the PPP/C received 31 seats in the National Assembly and the smaller political parties, with a joined list, received the last seat in the National Assembly. GECOM MUST DO ITS JOB According to Jagdeo, it is important that no further attempts be made to prevent GECOM from doing its job. He said, “We expect that the Chair (retired Justice Claudette Singh) will convene meeting and move this process to a speedy conclusion. We hope APNU will not continue with endeavours to block the speedy conclusion of the process.” The PPP General Secretary noted that the position of local stakeholders, are well as the international community, has been made clear and the will of the Guyanese people must not be subverted. “The international community, even before this ruling, has been very vocal on the use of the recount data. Now the international community, bolstered by a ruling by a unanimous decision of Guyana’s highest court, must feel vindicated,” he said. Notably, a meeting of the Guyana Elections Commission was set for Thursday (July 9, 2020) at 13:30hours (1:30PM), but was cancelled a few hours before. [SEE RELATED REPORTING ON PAGE 17]

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

Day 129…

GECOM Chair tells Coalition’s GECOM Commissioners force cancellation of GECOM meeting Lowenfield to present

report using numbers in Certificates of Recount

laiming they needed time to study the judgment of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), which was handed down on Wednesday (July 8, 2020) at 15:00hours (3:00PM) and made publicly available, the APNU+AFC Coalition-nominated GECOM Commissioners forced the cancellation of a meeting scheduled for 13:30hours (1:30PM) on Thursday (July 9, 2020). The Coalition’s GECOM Commissioners – Vincent Alexander, Charles Corbin and Desmond Trotman – did not offer public comments on their position. Meanwhile, Opposi-

From left, Desmond Trotman, Vincent Alexander and Charles Corbin

tion-nominated GECOM Commissioner, Sase Gunraj, on Thursday (July 9, 2020), confirmed that the meeting was postponed to Friday, July 10, 2020.

About yet another delay, he said, “Apparently colleagues on the other side need an opportunity to study the CCJ judgment. Hasn’t the country and its people suffered

enough? The CCJ ruling requires no gloss.” Officials of the Guyana Elections Commission’s Secretariat offered no comment on this matter.

he Certificates of Recount from the 10 Regions, which show an electoral win for the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C), are to be used as the basis for the final report from the embattled Chief Elections Officer (CEO), Keith Lowenfield. This was the instruction from the Chairperson of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), retired Justice Claudette Singh, to Lowenfield, in a letter dated Thursday, July 9, 2020. In the letter, she said, “In accordance with that section, and pursuant to article 177 (2) (b) of the Constitution and Section 96 of the Representation of the People Act

Cap 1:03, you are hereby requested to prepare and submit your report on the March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections by 2 pm on 10th July 2020, using the valid votes counted in the National Recount as per Certificates of Recount generated therefrom.” The GECOM Chair pointed out to Lowenfield that in accordance with Section 18 of the Election Laws Act No 15 of 2000 he is subject to the “direction and control of the Commission”. Lowenfield was given up to 14:00hours (2:00PM) on Friday (July 10, 2020) to complete his report and present it to the Commission.

Basil Williams incites Lowenfield... (From page 15)

were wrong to do so. Article 177(2)(b) rightly only needed to reference “more votes” and there was no basis for the Court of Appeal to assume jurisdiction to interpret that provision. It is clear that, under the legal infrastructure governing the electoral process, unless and until an election court decides otherwise, the votes already counted as valid votes are incapable of being declared invalid by any person or authority. “[47] ... The idea that the CEO or GECOM could, in an unaccountable, non-transparent and seemingly arbitrary manner, without the due processes and the legal standards established in Article 163 and in the Validation

Act, disenfranchise scores of thousands of electors is entirely inconsistent with the constitutional framework. Whatever allegations of irregularity attended those votes (and we neither agree nor disagree as to the existence of such irregularities) must be adjudged by the High Court under Article 163 as was correctly stated by the Chairperson of GECOM. In the circumstances we call for the immediate compliance with the Constitution, the Representation of the People Act and judgement of the Caribbean Court of Justice, as well as the rejection of the puerile and erroneous advice/opinion of Basil Williams. (July 10, 2020)

Day 130…

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

Day 130…

UK, EU diplomats repeat calls for Behaviour of Coalition officials raises doubt that they declaration based on recount results pressure is and that needs to be a focus. ongoing elections impasse. do the right thing – Golding International increasing and representa- And until we get an election “We are in a moment which

t is now for the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) to declare officially the result of the March 2020 Elections based on the national recount, and for those who are claiming electoral fraud to pursue that matter through the established legal process, that is via an election petition. This is according to Head of the Organization of American States (OAS) Election Observer Mission, Bruce Golding. Commenting on the local state of affairs on a Jamaica radio programme, he said, “The big question of course is whether (or not) the incumbent government is going to recognise and respect and accept the decision of the CCJ. The behaviour of the

functionaries of the government up to now raises serious doubt.” Golding has been outspoken about the developments in the electoral process over the past months. In May 2020, he was no holds barred, when he addressed the OAS Permanent Council and presented the preliminary report of the OAS Election Observer Mission. Golding had said, “I have never seen a more transparent effort to alter the results of an Election. More than a dozen copies of the Statements of Poll are prepared at each polling station after the ballots are counted on election night. One copy is posted on the wall outside the polling station and

each party representative – and there were nine in all – each party representative is entitled to receive a copy. It takes an extraordinarily courageous mind to present documents with fictitious numbers when there is such a sturdy paper trail exists. And this is being illustrated now as the recount proceeds,” he said. Further, after the first fraudulent declaration of results by Mingo on March 5, 2020, Golding noted that there were clear departures from established procedures. The OAS Electoral Observation Mission was one of five international Election Observation Missions accredited to observe Guyana’s General and Regional Elections on March 2, 2020.

tives of two diplomatic missions in Guyana, on Friday (July 10, 2020), reiterated the need for a final declaration of an electoral outcome, based on the results of the national recount. The United Kingdom (UK) representative, Gregory Quinn, in comments said, “This has gone on an awfully awfully long time and it really does need a resolution and it needs a resolution sooner rather than later...then we can have an administration which can focus on the real impacts –socially and economically –on issues like COVID

der Article 177(4). Whatever irregularities the CEO may have been concerned about were required to be addressed by an election petition filed in the High Court. The Court held that the GECOM Chairperson was right to note that GECOM lacked the legislative authority and the machinery to embark upon a determination of such irregularities. The Court took the view that what the Court of Appeal majority did was to embark upon an exercise of interpreting Order 60 and a consideration of the effect of that Order on the responsibilities of GECOM. The Court of Appeal then applied that to the clear words of Article 177(2) (b). Article 177(2)(b) of the Constitution has always said what it meant and meant what it said and there was no need for an interpretation of that Article or any other Article of the Constitution. There was nothing, therefore, in Ms David’s Application to trigger the Court of Appeal’s jurisdiction under Article 177(4). The Court noted that the concept of “valid votes” is well known to the legislative framework governing the electoral process. The concept has a particular meaning in that context. Validity in this context means, and could only mean, those votes that are valid on their face. The determination of such validity is laid down in the Representation of the People Act. It is a transparent exercise that weeds out of the process, for

example, spoilt or rejected ballots. This is an exercise conducted in the presence of the duly appointed candidates and counting agents of contesting parties. It is after such invalid votes are weeded out that the remaining “valid” votes count towards a determination of not only the members of the National Assembly but, incidentally as well, the winner from among the various listed Presidential candidates. If the integrity of a ballot, or the manner in which a vote was procured, is questioned beyond this transparent validation exercise then that would be a matter that must be pursued through Article 163 after the elections have been concluded and the winners declared. Unless and until an election court decides otherwise, the votes already counted by the recount process as valid votes are incapable of being declared invalid by any person or authority other than the High Court through an election petition. By the unnecessary insertion of the word “valid”, the Court of Appeal impliedly invited the CEO to engage unilaterally in a further and unlawful validation exercise that trespassed on the exclusive jurisdiction of the High Court established by Article 163. For all these reasons the Court adjudged that the provisions of Article 177(4) were not triggered by Ms David’s Application to the

Court of Appeal and the finality clause in that Article was inoperable. The Court of Appeal lacked jurisdiction to make the orders that were made as those Orders were not made under Article 177(4) of the Constitution. Under the laws of Guyana, the CCJ had jurisdiction to hear and determine the Application by Messrs Ali and Jagdeo and to set aside the decision of the Court of Appeal that was made without jurisdiction. It followed that the Appeal of Messrs Ali and Jagdeo succeeded, the decision of the Court of Appeal was ordered invalid and of no effect. The 23 June report of the CEO, that was based on this decision, was similarly of no effect. The Court noted that it has been four months since the elections were held and that the country has been without a Parliament for well over a year. No one in Guyana, the Court said, would regard this as a satisfactory state of affairs. The Court expressed the fervent hope that there would quickly be a peaceable restoration of normalcy. The Court was presided over by the President, the Honourable Mr Justice Saunders along with the Honourable Mr Justice Wit, Mme Justice Rajnauth-Lee, Mr Justice Barrow and Mr Justice Jamadar. [SEE PAGES 20-22 FOR THE CCJ’S JUDGMENT SUMMARY IN THIS CASE]

is very important, we are very hopeful, there has been a very clear, solid ruling by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) which is the recognised Court of Appeal and of course, this provides the foundation for a democratic solution to the post-electoral crisis in Guyana which has already lasted too long,” Ponz-Cantó said. The EU and UK, as well as the US and Canadian diplomatic missions in Guyana have issued several statements calling for a credible conclusion of the March 2020 General and Regional Elections.

In last ditch attempt at delay…

Lowenfield asks for instructions to be clarified

CCJ sets aside ruling of Appeal D Court, invalidates... (From page 16)

result declared, I don’t see the focus or the funding is going to be available to address the issues that need to be addressed.” Meanwhile, European Union’s (EU) Ambassador to Guyana, Fernando Ponz-Cantó, said, “We are very hopeful that GECOM will now do the declaration based on the CARICOM certified results and in accordance with the guidance provided by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).” He stressed that the CCK ruling was clear and provides a foundation for a “democratic solution” to the

espite the fact that the letter from the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Chairperson, retired Justice Claudette Singh, was clear, the Chief Elections Officer, Keith Lowenfield, on Friday (July 10, 2020), submitted a

letter asking for her instructions to be clarified. He was due to submit his final report, but submitted his letter seeking clarity first, as the Commission met to address the finalising of the electoral process.

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

Sanctions will come if the will of Guyanese is thwarted – former US State Dep’t official

former official of the United States of America’s (USA) Department of State, José Cárdenas, has underscored the need for the APNU+AFC Coalition leader, David Granger, to concede electoral defeat and allow the country to move forward. In a recently broadcast interview, he said, “My humble advice…is for President David Granger to concede...I hope President David Granger does what is best for his country. And

SANCTIONS LIKELY According to him, not doing so could result in consequences since the US has capabilities to “discourage bad actors from undermining democratic processes” in other countries. He said, “The use of sanctions frankly are a disincentive for people who have malign interests and I think claiming that an individual, for example, Georgetown involved in the elections who may have bad intentions can do so with impunity is

“Anybody in Georgetown who is thinking of either diverting the outcome of the election, the will of the Guyanese people…Washington absolutely has measures it can impose on that individual that relates to their ability to, for example, have a bank account in the United States or otherwise do banking in their private lives that touch the US economic system. That person also can lose their ability to travel to the United States. Their visa could be revoked.” – Former US State Dep’t official, José Cárdenas the Guyanese people. “…should the process in Guyana break down and you have an unwillingness of one of the parties in the election to concede and this uncertainty continues, there

“Should the process in Guyana break down and you have an unwillingness of one of the parties in the election to concede and this uncertainty continues, there is going to be discussions in Washington and in concert with the [Organization of American States] and no doubt, in concert, discussions and consultations with CARICOM. That does happen.” – Former US State Dep’t official, José Cárdenas I think that is to understand that the people have spoken….we are at a point now where I think for the good of the country he should concede. “…the controversies and the evolution of the political process in Guyana is an election that took place in March 2nd and here we are June 27th and there is still not a declared winner. Well that’s troublesome. It generates an amount of concern for the health of Guyana’s democracy and also for the Guyanese people…a hundred and something days later and yet the Guyanese people do not know who is going to be leading their next government. “…what Washington wants, what the United States wants is frankly what I suspect what most of the Guyanese people want, they want to move on and they want certainty. They want political certainty and they want to begin this process of getting more information and understanding more how their government is intending to manage this newfound wealth that is going to be experienced by Guyana in the next few years.”

dangerous and it’s reckless. “So anybody in Georgetown who is thinking of either diverting the outcome of the election, the will of the Guyanese people – as has been manifested in not only the March 2 election, but in the recount, which has been pretty clear from all press reports and it seems to be most of the international organisations, including CARICOM, have basically concluded that the recount shows that the opposition won the elections – Washington absolutely has measures it can impose on that individual that relates to their ability to, for example, have a bank account in the United States or otherwise do banking in their private lives that touch the US economic system. That person also can lose their ability to travel to the United States. Their visa could be revoked.” The view that sanctions will not be imposed, according to him, is totally fallacious. Cárdenas said, “It’s important to understand what the options are in the United States for all concerned is that if there is determined to be a government-wide conspiracy to thwart the will of

can have on their development in partnership with the Guyanese government of the oil patrimony of Guyana. “…I can’t help but think that there must be many Guyanese who are, maybe a little bit taken aback at the attention that the election in Guyana has attracted in Washington. Well here is a variety of reasons why that is so. Number one, is that Washington policymakers and those who follow events in the regions in Washington [have] become quite sensi-

any illegitimate government on this basis…we are taking about people that seek to participate in or benefit from electoral fraud…we have certain tools that are available to us, that have been used in other countries, in situations where governments were formed on the basis of electoral fraud…we felt it was important for us to signal to all involved in the process in Guyana that we were seriously following the issue, that we were willing to use the tools that are

“The US can put in place sectoral sanctions which would, of course, threaten the oil patrimony that Guyana now possesses…look what has happened to the oil exports of Venezuela… nobody wants to touch them.” – Former US State Dep’t official, José Cárdenas is going to be discussions in Washington and in concert with the [Organization of American States] and no doubt, in concert, discussions and consultations with CARICOM. That does happen because I’ve been on the inside. There will be consultations with the OAS, there will be consultations with the ABCE countries about how best the international community can help bring the situation to a successful end. “…absolutely the US can put in place sectoral sanctions which would, of course, threaten the oil patrimony that Guyana now possesses…look what has happened to the oil exports of Venezuela…nobody wants to touch them. The exports of Venezuelan oil have become radioactive and nobody is going to buy Venezuelan oil, no one is going to ship it. I am sure ExxonMobil is watching this with extreme concern about what the political impasse

tised to the, lets calls it, the health of democracy in the western hemisphere…so there is a renewed attention in Washington to democratic processes in the hemisphere and that naturally is why you may see this unprecedented, at least from Washington’s perspective as far as United States is concerned, attention towards Guyana.” WARNINGS ISSUED Notably, warnings have already been issued about personal sanctions have been issued by top officials of the US State Department. The US State Department’s Director of Caribbean Affairs of the Western Hemisphere, Katherine Dueholm, made clear that sanctions of persons who “participate in or benefit from electoral fraud” remains on the cards. In early May 2020, said: “We were very clear that what we were talking about was anyone who sought to participate in or benefit from electoral fraud or form

available should the situation require. We remain prepared to use the tools necessary of individuals or groups try to democratic process. We are not going to stand idly by where people try to make that happen…we have gone down the road, a pretty good distance, at what we might deploy. We have put that on hold for the moment as we enter the recount phase…on the presumption that from here on out we are going to have a democratic process, we are not proceeding any further with those type of actions, but they remain available tools.” Also, the US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, has warned on March 17, 2020 that those who seek to benefit from electoral fraud will be subject to serious consequences. In comments about Guyana, during a news conference then, he had said: “The United States is closely monitoring the tabulation of votes in Guyana; the election took place on March 2. We

join the OAS, Commonwealth, the EU, CARICOM and other democratic partners in calling for an accurate count….it is important to note that the individuals who seek to benefit from electoral fraud and to form illegitimate governments, regimes, will be subject to variety of serious consequences from the United States.” Further, days after polls closed on March 2, 2020, the crisis precipitated by the APNU+AFC Coalition’s power grab through manipulating the elections has reached the highest level of the United States Government. NO INTERFERENCE That said, Cárdenas rubbished the view that the positions taken by the international community are premature and may constitute foreign interference. According to him, countries, like Guyana, have signed on to the Inter-American Democratic Charter and are expected to uphold certain standards. “In that document, it says that democracy is not only the form of Government that should be in place in all countries of the hemisphere but that all countries should have an obligation to defend democracy wherever it is lacking or threatened or non-existent. So under that document which was signed again, one outlier may have been Cuba for obvious reasons, but the Inter-American Democratic Charter calls on all countries to be active in defending democracy,” he said. Cárdenas also served in senior positions in the US State Department, the National Security Council, and the US Agency for International Development.

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

OBSERVER

Duplicity seen from the top, as self-interests are pursued T he members of the leadership of the APNU+AFC Coalition have little or no regard for the people of Guyana, especially their supporters. This conclusion based upon the series of lies they have been peddling over the past few months, each lie often conflicting with the last. The APNU+AFC Coalition has been pushing its false narratives in the belief that those who recognize their lies do not matter and that their supporters will believe anything they say, regardless how ridiculous it is. Let’s take the Coalitions’

prime ministerial candidate and AFC leader, Khemraj Ramjattan, as an example. He was recorded admitting to the staff of the Ministry of Public Security that the Coalition lost the elections to the PPP/C by over 15,000 votes and was issuing his farewell speech to them. Ramjattan, on June 18, 2020, during a staff meeting involving Unit Heads of the Ministry of Public Security said: “It is with a little sadness that I want to say a couple of words to you…the numbers were against us… from all indications the PPP/C has beaten

us by some 15,000 vote…the loss of an election is tremendous. It is a difficult time for me, it’s kinda emotional. But at some point in time you have to make a departure because there’s always gonna be a winner and a loser…the declaration numbers are against us…we went into the recount and we lost, so be prepared to accept and to move on...I am prepared to accept and move on…it is the end of the government and it is with this that l wanted to tell you that it was an honour and pleasure being with you as the various Heads

of Unit under the Ministry of Public Security.” Lo and behold a mere few days after he denied saying exactly that and instead tried to spin what he said into something totally different. In an interview with a media house in Trinidad and Tobago, last week, Ramjattan said: “Being the prime ministerial candidate, you would have to move out from the Public Security Ministry and I was aware that there was going to be an announcement, just before this matter went to our Court of Appeal…so I just went to thank my officers, all the Heads of the Units of my ministry….that is exactly what I did…I thanked them for what they did. The results, one way or the other, will be declared soon and we will respect that and we will move on – I will move on if we win the Elections, certainly, to the office of Prime Minister.” The audacity to lie on television so easily when all evidence point to the truth should tell you about the character of this individual. Whatever semblance of integrity he had is now all gone and he has revealed himself to be a dishonest and opportunistic person. The quicker he is removed from the corridors of power, the better it will be for us all. Secondly, how can we forget David Patterson,m who boldly claimed at the start of the recount process, that the APNU+AFC Coalition was in possession of their Statements of Poll (SOPs), which they would make public and which will reveal their victory. We are still waiting on those SOPs, and we all know which party was revealed as the victor from the recount. Like all the APNU+AFC Coalition officials, this individual is at the forefront of all the lies being peddled by this defeated party. Then there is Aubrey Norton. It would appear that when the Coalition wants to peddle its most asinine positions, Norton is the designated buffoon. Whether it is dead people voting, to impersonators voting, to the PPP/C and Bharat Jagdeo paying off all the international ambassadors, Observers, CARICOM Heads and even the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), Norton is the man for the job. This person sells these conspiracies in the strongest terms, without providing an iota of evidence. This evidence is often held in abeyance for some later time, that never seem to materialize. One would have expected that in at least one of the court cases, the so-called evidence would have been presented, but, as

expected, it is all talk and nothing else. One can only wonder if Norton, who has often been treated like a footstool by the PNC, is now trying to bolster his credentials within the party by being its loudest and most obnoxious cheer leader. Further, the less said about Christopher Jones and Sherod Duncan is the best. These two individuals on a daily basis spew a series of lies and hate. Their actions only serve to remind us about the nature of the APNU+AFC Coalition and why it is imperative that we do everything within our power that we have better leaders walking the corridors of government offices. What is sad however is that they are not only embarrassing themselves and the Coalition, but they are embarrassing the entire country. Also, time and time again, Joseph Harmon has taken to the airwaves to spread his false propaganda, and have been deliberately misleading the supporters of the APNU+AFC Coalition. Harmon is trained in the law and knows fully well what the Constitution states. However he deliberately misinterprets and misrepresents what the law states to fit a selfish agenda. Unfortunately, some lap up the lies. As old people would say, he lies like horse trotting. Finally, when it comes to the ringmaster, APNU+AFC Coalition leader, David Granger, the duplicity of this person knows no bounds. It is not uncommon for you to expect to take a president at his word. You expect a president to be consistent and you can expect him to honor whatever he says. Unfortunately for us Guyanese, we cannot take this president at his word. Time and time again he has gone back on his word whenever the circumstances are not favorable to him. This is most unbecoming of a president. He first acknowledged the requirements of the no-confidence motion, which is that 33 is the needed majority vote, then cried foul when his government was defeated. When the no-confidence motion was passed, his reaction was that he would abide by the consequences, which is to have elections called within three months, but then was fully behind a court case that challenged the validity of the no-confidence motions. When the court matters, related to the December 2018 no-confidence motion, were disposed on, Granger promised to respect the rulings of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), but then reneged using the

Coalition-nominated GECOM Commissioners and compromised staff odf the GECOM Secretariat to frustrate the preparations for elections. Granger also promised to honor the ruling of the CCJ and orders that designated his governmetn a caretaker government, but reneged – a move that saw the transfer of state lands and other transactions that a caretaker government has no business engaging in. Once the elections were finally held in March 20020 – a year after they were constitutionally due – Granger promised to have the recount done, only then to have his candidate, Ulita Moore, challenge it in court. He promised to accept the results of the recount, only to renege. There is now all sorts of resistance to accepting the recount results, which show the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) as the winners of the March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections. Granger promised to accept the findings of the CARICOM team, which scrutinized the national recount, but has been cherry picking what he liked and totally ignore the findings of the team – which is that the national recount results should be used as the basis for a final declaration of the election winner. These are only a few examples of the duplicity of Granger. It is obvious that his officials are just following his lead and their behaviors and actions are in lock step with him. We hope those officials in the APNU+AFC Coalition know that all their lies and deceits will catch up to them and soon there will be a reckoning. Their actions have placed this country in great peril; our economy is on the verge of collapse and we have seen a recent surge in those being tested positive for COVID-19. Their handling of these two major issues have been amateurish at best, as they have spent their time and energies on on misleading the nation to maintain power, whilst the Guyanese people suffer. That said, there is still time to salvage the situation; the APNU+AFC Coalition can concede and allow the democratic transition of the rightful elected government. This would be the ultimate act of putting country first. Time will tell if the Coalition persists with their self-interests or whether the Granger-led group will rise to the occasion and put the interests of our people at the forefront of their considerations.

WEEKEND MIRROR 11-12 JULY, 2020

Guyana’s COVID-19 cases Emerging evidence to show that COVID-19 spreads in the air - WHO up to 286 ‒ deaths up to 16 T

he Ministry of Public Health disclosed that Guyana now has 286 confirmed cases of coronavirus (COVID-19). The country’s record of deaths stands at 16. The first COVID-19 death was recoded on March 11, 2020. Based in the numbers, Guyana has a death rate of 6 per cent, according to Deputy Chief Medical Officer Dr. Karen Gordon-Boyle, in an update on Wednesday (July 8, 2020). “If the number of positive cases and deaths are not evidence enough of the presence and effects of COVID-19, then we are in a very terrible position in our response to this disease,” she had said. Guyana’s cases have shown that persons between the ages of 20 to 29 are mostly affected, unlike the trend in other countries. To date, a total of 3,019 tests have been administered. Additionally, there have been over 125 recoveries to date. Cases have been reported in most all of Guyana’s 10 Administrative Regions.

However, the most recent area to record confirmed cases is Region 1 (Barima/ Waini) and it has recorded 69 per cent of the country’s active cases. Further, a study done released on April 1, 2020, by the Pan American Health Organisation/World Health Organisation (PAHO/WHO) and the Ministry of Public Health, indicated that Guyana can see over 20,000 cases of the coronavirus. To date, the virus has hit 211 countries globally and over ten million people having been confirmed as victims of COVID-19, while there have been over 500, 000 deaths. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by a newly discovered coronavirus. Most people infected with the COVID-19 virus will experience mild to moderate respiratory illness and recover without requiring special treatment. Older people and those with underlying medical problems like cardiovascular disease, diabetes,

chronic respiratory disease, and cancer are more likely to develop serious illness. The incubation period for COVID-19, which is the time between exposure to the virus and symptom onset, is on average 5-6 days, but can be as long as 14 days. The best way to prevent and slow down transmission is be well informed about the COVID-19 virus, the disease it causes and how it spreads. Protect yourself and others from infection by washing your hands or using an alcohol based rub frequently and not touching your face. The COVID-19 virus spreads primarily through droplets of saliva or discharge from the nose when an infected person coughs or sneezes, so it’s important that you also practice respiratory etiquette (for example, by coughing into a flexed elbow). At this time, there are no specific vaccines or treatments for COVID-19, although trials are being conducted.

COVID-19 emergency measures extended to July 17th A n Order signed by the de facto Health Minister, Volda Lawrence, extended the COVID-19 emergency measures, including the 6PM to 6AM lockdown, to July 17, 2020. “A curfew is hereby imposed throughout Guyana from 3rd July, 2020 to 17th July, 2020 between the hours of 6:00pm and 6:00am,” the Order, which is dated Wednesday, July 2, 2020.

The 16-point Order also addresses matters relating to: persons being restricted to their homes, unless they are considered essential workers; restriction of social activities; social distancing and physical distancing protocols; and also states that persons cannot call the COVID-19 hotline number without a justifiable reason. The Order applies to all 10 Regions of Guyana.

(BBC) The World Health Organization has acknowledged there is emerging evidence that the coronavirus can be spread by tiny particles suspended in the air. The airborne transmis-

estimating the possibility of airborne transmission. The WHO has so far said that the virus is transmitted through droplets when people cough or sneeze.

prevent larger super spreading events, larger outbreaks and those occur in indoor environments with poor ventilation, with crowding and with prolonged close contact.”

sion could not be ruled out in crowded, closed or poorly ventilated settings, an official said. If the evidence is confirmed, it may affect guidelines for indoor spaces. An open letter from more than 200 scientists had accused the WHO of under-

"We wanted them to acknowledge the evidence," Jose Jimenez, a chemist at the University of Colorado who signed the paper, told the Reuters news agency. He added, “This is definitely not an attack on the WHO. It's a scientific debate, but we felt we needed to go public because they were refusing to hear the evidence after many conversations with them.” Another signatory - Professor Benjamin Cowling of Hong Kong University - told the BBC the finding had "important implications". He said, “In healthcare settings, if aerosol transmission poses a risk then we understand healthcare workers should really be wearing the best possible preventive equipment... and actually the World Health Organization said that one of the reasons they were not keen to talk about aerosol transmission of COVID-19 is because there's not a sufficient number of these kind of specialised masks for many parts of the world… and in the community, if we're thinking about aerosol transmission being a particular risk, then we need to think about how to

The WHO has since admitted there was evidence to suggest this was possible in specific settings, such as enclosed and crowded spaces. That evidence will have to be thoroughly evaluated, but if it is confirmed, the advice on how to prevent the virus spreading may have to change, and could lead to more widespread use of masks, and more rigorous distancing, especially in bars, restaurants, and on public transport. However, WHO officials have cautioned the evidence is preliminary and requires further assessment. Benedetta Allegranzi, the WHO's technical lead for infection prevention and control, said that evidence emerging of airborne transmission of the coronavirus in "crowded, closed, poorly ventilated settings that have been described, cannot be ruled out". For months, the WHO has insisted that COVID-19 is transmitted via droplets emitted when people cough or sneeze. Droplets that do not linger in the air, but fall onto surfaces - that's why handwashing has been identified as a key prevention measure.

Independent evaluation of global COVID-19 response announced W orld Health Organisation (WHO) Director-General, on Thursday (July 9, 2020), announced the initiation of the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response (IPPR) to evaluate the world’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In remarks to WHO Member States, Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said the Panel will be co-chaired by former Prime Minister of New Zealand Helen Clark and former President of Liberia Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. Prime Minister Clark went to on lead the United Nations Development Programme and President Sirleaf is a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. Operating independently,

they will choose other Panel members as well as members of an independent secretariat to provide support. “Prime Minister Clark and President Sirleaf were selected through a process of broad consultation with Member States and world experts. I cannot imagine two more strong-minded, independent leaders to help guide us through this critical learning process.” said Dr. Tedros in his speech. At the historic 73rd World Health Assembly in May, Member States adopted a landmark resolution that called on WHO to initiate an independent and comprehensive evaluation of the lessons learned from the international health response to COVID-19.

“This is a time for self-reflection, to look at the world we live in and to find ways to strengthen our collaboration as we work together to save lives and bring this pandemic under control,” said Dr Tedros. “The magnitude of this pandemic, which has touched virtually everyone in the world, clearly deserves a commensurate evaluation.” Dr Tedros proposed that a Special Session of the Executive Board be called in September to discuss the Panel’s progress. In November the Panel will present an interim report at the resumption of the World Health Assembly. In January 2021, the Executive Board will hold its regular session, where the Panel’s work will be fur-

ther discussed; and in May of next year, at the World Health Assembly, the panel will present its substantive report. The Director-General noted that the Independent Oversight and Advisory Committee for the WHO Health Emergencies Programme will also continue its existing work. “Even as we fight this pandemic, we must be readying ourselves for future global outbreaks and the many other challenges of our time such as antimicrobial resistance, inequality and the climate crisis,” said Dr Tedros. “COVID-19 has taken so much from us. But it is also giving us an opportunity to break with the past and build back better.”

Phillips to Guyana’s security forces: ‘Do not follow unlawful orders’

anks of Guyana’s Disciplined Services, specifically those from the Guyana Defence Force (GDF) and Guyana Police Force (GPF), have been urged to resist “unlawful orders” from the de facto APNU+AFC Coalition. The call came from the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) prime min-

isterial candidate, retired Brigadier Mark Phillips. He said, “I want to speak to the security forces, the Guyana Defence Force and the Guyana Police Force, they have an important role to play in upholding the rule of law during this critical time in Guyana. These Forces must not follow any unlawful or-

der. We have a president and that president will soon be replaced by another president in keeping with the declaration of GECOM.” He stressed that the bedrock of democracies is respect for the will of the people. “The people voted for the PPP/C, and the PPP/C must be allowed to assume

office in this country peacefully in keeping with the laws of Guyana, so that Guyana can once again be respected by the wider Caribbean, by the wider Western Hemisphere and by the world… we must not go back to the days of rigged elections. That is something of the past; the system was reengineered

for the 1992 elections. And that is the system we used from 1992 to now, and it’s difficult to rig post 1992… our elections at all times must represent the will of the people,” Phillips said. According to him, the transition of government must not only be democratic, but also be peaceful. “In the name of decency, in the name of being civilized, we have to respect the laws that we signed on to…we have to respect the law,” Phillips said, referring to the clear

judgment that was handed down by the Caribbean Court of Justice on Wednesday (July 8, 2020), relative to a challenge blocking a final declaration of election results based on the outcome of the recount. Based on the national recount, which ended on June 9, 2020, there were a total of 460,352 valid votes, of which the PPP/C secured over 233,000 votes. The PPP/C, based on the recount results, won the March 2020 Elections by 15,416 votes.

De facto gov’t continues to act illegally – Nandlall

ontinuing to disregard its status as a de facto administration, the David Granger-led APNU+AFC Coalition has pushed ahead with the appointment of new State Boards, in a ‘business as usual’ approach, similar to what was seen after the successful December 2018 no-confidence motion. The appointment of five new State Boards – Environmental Assessment Board (EAB); Wildlife Scientific Committee (WSC); the Protected Areas Commission (PAC); the Guyana Wildlife Conservation and Management Commission (GWCMC); and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – saw the placement of 44 persons as Directors. The details of the appointments were contained in an Order published in the Official Gazette, dated June 22, 20202, and signed by the Coalition’s Dawn Hastings-Williams. People’s Progressive Party (PPP) Executive and former Attorney General, Anil Nandlall, has since dubbed

the move as “wholly illegal” in the current circumstances. He said, “A caretaker government is bound in law to behave as a caretaker. The caretaker of a property, for example, is not the owner… and therefore can’t make fundamental changes of any type; decisions of any type, or enter into new contract, or make new appointments. “…its behaviour was further compounded,” he said, “when Parliament was officially dissolved and a date was set for the elections. Certainly, after the elections the situation became worse, especially after the results of the elections are known and the Coalition has lost the government. Clearly, they can’t make appointments to boards.” According to him, at the “appropriate time”, those appointments will have to revisited and reviewed. This is the latest move by the Coalition that exceeds its current authority and follows the transfer of dozens of plots of state lands in questionable dealings.

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