Skip to main content

FM
Former Member
A bad week
Posted By Stabroek staff On December 11, 2011 @ 5:01 am In Editorial | STABROEK NEWS
Suspicion is the curse of this country. There are historical reasons for it, of course, which hardly need any elaboration, but in terms of its consequences it produces all kinds of irrationalities. Last week in particular was not a good week for the nation. At the bottom of everything which went wrong was the whole matter of the Statements of Poll (SoP). In fact, possibly much of what happened could have been avoided if Gecom had simply agreed to make available the SoPs at the time APNU requested them. They are, after all, public documents and were posted outside the polling stations after the count, so there should have been no problem providing copies to all the political parties, and not just to APNU.
No doubt Gecom was irritated by Mr David Granger’s insistence that the party he represented would not accept the results unless it saw the SoPs, but as a public agency in charge of a democratic election process it has a duty to ensure that the parties – and by extension the public – are satisfied that everything is transparent. This is especially so in circumstances where mistrust is ingrained in the social psyche. As it was, it was perhaps no surprise that elements in APNU married the delays in the announcement of results to the reluctance to make available the SoPs, and arrived at the conclusion that everything was not kosher. Gecom’s stance, of course was not helped by the fact that it had granted a recount to the PPP/C even before the results had been announced, so its lack of response to APNU opened it to accusations of a lack of even-handedness.
It was Mr Raphael Trotman of the AFC who was reported in this newspaper on Thursday as pointing out that following the 2006 election, the parties received a CD Rom with all of the scanned SoPs and the signatures of the certifying officers. He went on to say: “[Gecom] has a judicial function and if it carries out that function it has a right to show the basis for how it acted. It has a statutory and constitutional duty to provide the supporting documentation to show how it arrived at its decision.” So why, an observer might ask, was what was done almost routinely in 2006, impossible to do in 2011? At the very least it suggests poor judgement.
Eventually, of course, the SoPs were released, but that was after the intervention of the Private Sector Commission, which is not a stakeholder in the election although it seems to have given itself a high profile during this year’s poll, in the process damaging its reputation. Exactly why the PSC should get a hearing from Gecom and a political party like APNU representing 40.8% of the votes cast should be ignored, is not something which is easily explained, and simply served to increase suspicion.
In the meantime, of course, demonstrators were out on the streets over the matter of the SoPs, making clear their conviction that Mr Granger should have won, and the election had been stolen from APNU through fraud. The first thing which has to be said is that the protests have been perfectly peaceful; however, in a society like this with its history of post-elections violence, any kind of demonstration makes many people apprehensive, including the business community which has lost so much in the past. In a general sense too, such action has the potential to raise the temperature at this time, making it more difficult, rather than less so, to achieve the accommodations between the parties which the election results indicate the electorate wants.
This does not mean to say that peaceful marches and demonstrations are not legitimate; they are, but in this particular instance (the protest outside the Ministry of Home Affairs over the police shooting excepted) the issue is one of judgement, and one wonders what the leadership – particularly some members of the WPA – is telling the young people who are on the streets. One can see that the protestors might assume that Mr Granger had won the presidency given that the PPP/C made sure the odds were stacked against the opposition during the run-up to the election, while their reluctance to relinquish power was evidenced in their decision to ask for a recount. There is too the simple fact that the PNC rigged elections for many years, and it is easy for some in the APNU base to believe that the PPP/C would do the same thing. In addition there are the suspicions which have been raised about the decline in PPP/C votes not being reflected in Regions 3 and 4 to the extent that they were in 5 and 6, for example. Finally, the early results which came in favoured APNU, giving the impression the party was doing better than it eventually did.
While the inferences the base made are understandable, it is for leaders to explain the realities to them. Early results, for example, always favour the PNC (in this case, APNU), and the bulk of PPP votes invariably come in later. The problem is one cannot extrapolate in this country from the results in one locale or even quite a number of them. Secondly, as was said last week, the sprawling housing schemes in Regions 3 and 4, where so many assumed PPP supporters had been given house lots, would have affected the PPP/C vote there, and that portion of the constituency would have been far less influenced by the pull of Mr Nagamootoo than the one in his home terrain of Region 6, and to a lesser extent, Region 5.
Those, however, are relatively minor arguments. A more major one is the fact that with 48.6% of the vote, the PPP/C would still have needed 5,265 more votes to secure an overall majority. APNU, therefore, with 40.8% of the vote, would need many thousands more than this to achieve the same end. And if, supposing, it really were the case that the party had been deprived of thousands of votes, then that could only have been achieved with rigging on an industrial scale – something that was simply not possible. The OAS observers were embedded in Gecom watching every stage of the tabulation process and there is no way many thousands of votes could have been stolen right under their noses. And in any case, if the PPP/C, for the sake of argument, in cahoots with Gecom, were going to steal thousands of votes, they surely would not do such a poor job of it that they would not give themselves an overall majority.
No, the result is accurate, and it is what it is. There may conceivably be some minor discrepancies which need explaining or reconciling, but there will be nothing which will change the final outcome. In any case, APNU must have had its registered agents in a large number of polling stations and be in possession of copies of those poll statements. In addition, Mr David Patterson of the AFC has said that he supplied some copies of SoPs to APNU that they did not have, so the latter’s leadership even before they received the CD Rom should have had a fair idea, one would have thought, that the result did not reflect fraud. Be that as it may, by now they can be in no doubt that it doesn’t.
So what are their supporters doing on the streets, when they know what the reality is, and when all that will happen is that they damage their party’s long-term chances of improving on their result? Street action is quite simply a cul-de-sac. The problem is that now it will be difficult to get the APNU demonstrators off the streets and persuade them to accept that their assumptions are mistaken. In addition, some of the WPA leaders along with one or two ex-military men of the PNC are talking in very militant terms at a time when negotiating skills are at a premium. In the case of the WPA, a party which had long talked of shared governance, it raises the question as to whether it truly believes in that at all, since after being given the opportunity to work with other parties, its leaders, at least, are on the barricades instead. As for some of their ex-military associates from the PNC, they are more familiar with giving orders and physical action than doing the slog work to achieve political compromises. And contrary to what they or the WPA might be tempted to think, a national unity government cannot be imposed by force or threats or demonstrations; it is a contradiction in terms and a denial of the democratic process.
And if all of this were not enough, the police had their own contribution to make to the fiasco of last week, and it was no small contribution. With their customary uncertain aim, Georgetown’s finest fired rubber pellets at some marchers and succeeded in hitting a child and elderly women, among several others, some of whom were not even part of the march. It was nothing short of a disgrace. Illegal though the march may have been, the participants were unarmed and had not damaged anyone or anything and gave no evidence of being about to do so or of representing a genuine threat. After a lapse of two days the Ministry of Home Affairs said it had not instructed that rubber bullets be used, while the Commissioner of Police added his ‘It wasn’t me’-style comment. However, following the incident the police had issued a totally unsatisfactory statement which contained no kind of apology, merely describing what had happened as “unfortunate.” The Ministry has ordered a probe, and the least that can be expected is that it should be a serious investigation and that whoever really did take the decision, will be disciplined and not given just a slap on the wrist.
As if that were not bad enough, the police did not finish there, and decided to prosecute some of the marchers. One might have thought they had done enough damage injuring people and frightening children in nearby schools, without aggravating a difficult situation further by giving a further profile to certain marchers and according them a kind of martyr status. Apparently,
however, common sense is not much in evidence in the GPF. This is in a context where they still have not charged Mr Lumumba, for example, for an alleged assault at a polling station on Election Day.
As for the mass of the Guyanese public, they still live in hope – admittedly fast diminishing – that a little common sense all around will lead us in a more fruitful direction.
________________________________________
Article printed from Stabroek News: http://www.stabroeknews.com
URL to article: http://www.stabroeknews.com/20...al/12/11/a-bad-week/

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Once the SOPs are confirmed .... I am ready to see them throw down in parliament two days after boxing day.

This should be a top billing fight on Dec 28th.

Grab your popcorn and let's get ready to rumble.
FM
quote:
Originally posted by Spice Girl:
A bad week
. Exactly why the PSC should get a hearing from Gecom and a political party like APNU representing 40.8% of the votes cast should be ignored, is not something which is easily explained, and simply served to increase suspicion.
]


Marlon I assume that you agree with this too.
FM
Silence often means consent....since A.P.N.U had received a copy of the S.O.P's from GECOM...they appears to be silent, many believes, the S.O.P's simply confirms the A.P.N.U failure at the polls...
FM
quote:
Originally posted by albert:
Silence often means consent....since A.P.N.U had received a copy of the S.O.P's from GECOM...they appears to be silent, many believes, the S.O.P's simply confirms the A.P.N.U failure at the polls...


So what is the PPP now doing to reach out to them and show you all are serious about being inclusive? You cant accuse them of being disruptive.

Given that the PPP cannot ass abudget unless either the AFC or APNU agrees to it, and the two are most likely going to drive a hard bargain as they need to show their supporters they mean business......how can you say the PPP won?

The PPP can do NOTHINg without the opposition allowing them to...even calling ano confidence vote whining that they cant govern.
FM
quote:
Originally posted by Nuff:
Once the SOPs are confirmed .... I am ready to see them throw down in parliament two days after boxing day.

This should be a top billing fight on Dec 28th.

Grab your popcorn and let's get ready to rumble.
the ppp is in for a rude awaking,i cannot wait for fun to begin
FM
quote:
Originally posted by warrior:
the ppp is in for a rude awaking,i cannot wait for fun to begin


The problem is the post election behavior of the PPP has helped people understand why they had to be removed from total power.

Where is the genuine desire to work with the opposition? Words but no deeds.
FM


Discrepancies in the SOPs


************

APNU sees discrepancies in the Statements of Poll
Written by Kwesi Isles
Thursday, 15 December 2011 15:46

A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) says there are discrepancies between the records of the Statements of Poll (SoPs) provided by the Guyana Elections Commission and its own of the November 28 polls and it intends to pursue them. At an APNU news briefing on Thursday coalition official Dr. Rupert Roopnaraine urged reporters to await the final report from the verification exercise which is expected to be completed Friday evening. The party had earlier said it expected the exercise to be finished by midweek.

“I don’t want to give you partial findings; what I can tell you is that there have been a number of inconsistencies, anomalies which we are attempting to pursue and attempting to analyse, that much I can say. There has not been a complete convergence and in that regard we don’t at this moment wish to speculate on either the scale of that convergence or lack of convergence and what its implications are,” Dr. Roopnaraine stated. In response to a question he said they have identified some specific SoPs in which they have “a greater interest than others” both in and out of Georgetown.

The APNU has said it considers the verification exercise a necessary undertaking within the election process, given “the several acts of mismanagement and breaches of procedure and law perpetrated by GECOM.” GECOM Chairman Dr. Steve Surujbally has consistently maintained that there were no irregularities in the election machinery. The coalition has called for the overhauling of the Commission and the resignation of its leadership in Dr. Surujbally and Chief Election Officer Gocool Boodoo, a call that has been the subject of several protests since the announcement of the results on December 1. “Their resignation must be the first step in the process of a complete overhaul of the elections commission. A.P.N.U calls for the establishment of an independent and professional elections commission which is elected by two-thirds of the Parliament. There must be clearly set out criteria for membership of the commission. Such a commission will open new vistas for the proper conduct of elections that are credible and acceptable to the Guyanese electorate,” an APNU statement read on Thursday.

The dissatisfaction stems from the delivery of the final results of the elections several days after Guyanese went to the polls. Additionally, the APNU has also accused the Commission of colluding with the ruling PPP/C. “What is worse is that there is compelling evidence that they were in collusion with the PPP/C and were on the verge of incorrectly declaring the PPP/C to have won a majority when they did not. It was only as a result of the vigilance and quick action by the opposition members of the Commission that the entire will of the people was not sacrificed at the altar of narrow partisan political interest,” the release stated. According to the APNU, the attitude and approach of Dr. Surujbally and Boodoo has fueled “the growing mistrust of the people for the Elections Commission.”
FM
Roopnaraine sounds like he's on top of things. You see I like this kind of candidate who gets up and speaks his mind, not like the lame Hinds and Luncheon who only speak when the PPP says speak. Then when they speak it's ramblings.
FM
Evidently, APNU did not know of the importance of the SOPs and therefore did not properly arrange to collect them. That is why AFC was asked to provide APNU with copies of theirs for the party's verification exercise.
Imagine APNU created such hell against Gecom for taking 3 days to complete the count and seats allocation. It's now over a week and APNU's Dr Roopnarine makes a feeble excuse for not yet reporting their find to the nation. That is because APNU is "searching for a needle in a haystack".
FM
quote:
Originally posted by caribj:

the PPP cannot ass abudget unless either the AFC or APNU agrees to it, and the two are most likely going to drive a hard bargain .


nothing wrong with that, their supporters will demand they do, and that is democracy in action.
FM
PNC/APNU has now been exposed. These are the guys who want to govern ? Beware of the PNC/APNU.

quote:
Originally posted by Spice Girl:
Evidently, APNU did not know of the importance of the SOPs and therefore did not properly arrange to collect them. That is why AFC was asked to provide APNU with copies of theirs for the party's verification exercise.
Imagine APNU created such hell against Gecom for taking 3 days to complete the count and seats allocation. It's now over a week and APNU's Dr Roopnarine makes a feeble excuse for not yet reporting their find to the nation. That is because APNU is "searching for a needle in a haystack".
G
quote:
Originally posted by Guyana1:
PNC/APNU has now been exposed. These are the guys who want to govern ? Beware of the PNC/APNU.

quote:
Originally posted by Spice Girl:
Evidently, APNU did not know of the importance of the SOPs and therefore did not properly arrange to collect them. That is why AFC was asked to provide APNU with copies of theirs for the party's verification exercise.
Imagine APNU created such hell against Gecom for taking 3 days to complete the count and seats allocation. It's now over a week and APNU's Dr Roopnarine makes a feeble excuse for not yet reporting their find to the nation. That is because APNU is "searching for a needle in a haystack".
First, they are not merely counting, they are doing a forensic analysis as it suits them. In any event, they are not contesting the results before the courts but are voicing concerns as to the peculiarity of GECOM in delivery of the results. That the PPP asked for and later rescinded their appeal for a recount is also problematic. Let them count as long as they want. I also want to lay my hand on the data so I can scrum it statistically not only to see how people voted and where but to anticipate voting patterns and where each party is strong or weak.
FM
Writ filed challenging controversial President’s benefits package
By Stabroek editor | 0 Comments | Local | Friday, December 16, 2011

Candidate at the recently concluded general elections, Desmond Trotman has moved to the courts challenging the constitutionality of the controversial benefits bill which was passed by the Jagdeo administration and signed into law in 2009. That law which gives a series of benefits without caps to former President Bharrat Jagdeo and any other former President has been widely condemned by the opposition and parts of civil society and was one of the major planks in the recent general election campaign.

The attorney general has 10 days following service of the writ to enter an appearance in the matter. The matter will be heard in chambers. In an affidavit in support of the application for a conservatory order, Trotman says he has been advised that the Former Presidents (Benefits and other Facilities) Act 2009 is unconstitutional.

Referring to Article 181 (2) of the Constitution which says that “A person who has held the office of President shall receive such pension or, upon the expiration of his term of office, such gratuity as may be prescribed by Parliament. Any such pension or gratuity shall be a charge on the Consolidated Fund”, Trotman says he has been advised by his attorney that the Act assented to in 2009, to wit Sections 2 and 3, violate this article of the constitution. Trotman said that he then caused an action to be filed and was seeking the following orders: a declaration that the Former Presidents (Benefits and Other Facilities) Act 2009 which purports to amend Article 181(2) of the Constitution without complying with the special legislative procedure set out in Article 164 of the Constitution is unconstitutional, null and void.

Trotman, a longstanding member of the Working People’s Alliance and a candidate for A Partnership for National Unity at the recent elections, is also seeking a conservatory order preserving the status quo which existed prior to the date when the Act came into force until the determination of the proceedings. The sections of the Act cited by Trotman as unconstitutional are:

(2) Every person who having held the office of President and ceased to hold that office by virtue of the provisions of article 92 of the Constitution or otherwise shall, during the remainder of his lifetime, be entitled to the following -

a) payment in respect of the expenses incurred in the provision and use of water, electricity and telephone services at the place of residence in Guyana;

b) services of personal and household staff including an attendant and a gardener;

c) services of clerical and technical staff, if requested;

d) free medical attendance and medical treatment or reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by him for the medical attendance or treatment of himself and the dependant members of his family;

e) full-time personal security and services of Presidential Guard Service at the place of residence;

f) the provision of vehicles owned and maintained by the State;

g) toll free road transportation in Guyana;

h) an annual vacation allowance equivalent to the cost of two first class return airfares provided on the same basis as that granted to serving members of the Judiciary;

i) a tax exemption status identical to that enjoyed by a serving President.

Section 3 of the Act says: The Minister may, subject to negative resolution of the National Assembly, make regulations for giving effect to the provisions of this Act.

The summons was taken out by attorney at law Christopher Ram.
FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×