Here is what the heads of mission of the US, UK, EU and Canada had to say about the election results of the March 2020 poll.
I quote; “We call on all to ensure proper procedures are in place to yield a credible election result. A fair and free process is vital for the maintenance and reinforcement of democracy in Guyana.
“We call on President Granger to avoid a transition of government which we believe would be unconstitutional as it would be based on a vote tabulation process that lacked credibility and transparency.”
I would suggest you read three words in the last line. I repeat them; “it would be based.” Those words had to be chosen carefully. Those words did not go like this, “it could be seen,” ”it may be seen.”
“Could be seen” or “may be seen” lack the strength and definitiveness of “would be seen.” In explanatory terms, the ABC/EU diplomats are saying that if Mr. Granger becomes the next president based on the shape of the current election results, it would (note the word “would”) be an unconstitutional presidency since it would be based on a flawed tabulation process.
Here is what the Resident UN representative said; “We encourage the relevant Guyanese authorities to finalise the process in a manner which leaves no doubts as to the credibility of the results that reflect the will of the Guyanese people.”
The operative word here is “finalise.” If the UN Rep used that , it means she does not accept GECOM’s final declaration which was made on Thursday by Returning Officer Mingo because her statement came out on Friday.
She could not have accepted Thursday’s GECOM’s declaration yet urged that the finalisation process come into reality.
Here is what the US State Department wrote; “No candidate should declare victory or be sworn in while serious questions remain about credibility of March 2 elections and whether procedures were followed.”
As in the position of the UN Rep, the US Government has not accepted Thursday’s GECOM declaration. Here is what a bi-partisan delegation of four US House of Representative lawmakers said; “We call on the Election Commission (GECOM) to return to the established procedure and not to declare a winner until a credible vote tabulation process has been completed.”
Again, I repeat, the Thursday GECOM announcement has not been accepted by important international observers.
Let’s do some logical thinking. Why would these international stakeholders embrace these positions if the APNU+AFC asserts victory and GECOM has made its final decision?
If we put that question to the leadership of APNU+AFC what answer can we anticipate? It could only be one of two. These international stakeholders are biased in the direction of the PPP or they are not in possession of the facts?
Let’s discuss number two first. From the time of the close of poll until confusion rained down on GECOM operation in the Ashmin’s building on Wednesday, the international and locally accredited observers have been actively involved in watching the different stages unfold.
My question is, “What facts do APNU+AFC have in its possession that the observers are not aware of?”
The first question is bias towards the PPP. The man who led the PPP government from 1999 and had a huge influence over the Ramotar presidency is Bharrat Jagdeo. But he never had a cozy relationship with western countries.
What is the relationship between the PPP and the ABC/EU states that would make them reject a GECOM declaration of the results of the elections? I can only give my opinion. I don’t think there is anything special or has been anything special when Jagdeo was president.
Here is my answer as to why the global community has not accepted GECOM’s final statistics. The observers, including all the ABC/EU diplomats, the Carter Center, former Prime Minister of Jamaica, Bruce Golding, and former Barbados Prime Minister saw the tabulation process late Monday night and into the uncivilised hours of Tuesday morning. They have the results.
Mr. Gerry Gouveia in his capacity as Chairman of the Private Sector Commission (PSC) issued a press release on Tuesday afternoon stating that the PSC went at length to witness the tabulation and the PSC and is puzzled why the GECOM Chair had not made the declaration as yet (meaning Tuesday morning).
The ABC/EU diplomats did not get their information by second-hand means. They saw the tabulation of the statements of poll soon after the counting was done therefore they are in shock as to what took place on Wednesday.
I end with my opinion that I have a right to. I do not believe the APNU+AFC won the election. My belief is that the PPP did.
Norway has joined the international community in calling for the final results of the March 2 general and regional elections to be credible and transparent.
Ambassador of the Kingdom of Norway, Nils Martin Genneng posted on twitter that “Norway shares concerns expressed regarding recent electoral developments in Guyana. The final election results needs to be credible and transparent.”
Senior members of the diplomatic community in Guyana have joined with international observers to urge that the electoral process follows all transparent and credible procedures.
The Heads of Mission of the A,B,C countries and the European Union on Friday expressed deep concern over credible allegations of electoral fraud.
They also called on President Granger to avoid a transition of government which they believe would be unconstitutional at this time.
The U.S. Department of State has also urged that no candidate be sworn in until issues are resolved surrounding the declaration of unverified results for the country’s largest voting district.
Meanwhile, the international observer missions from the Commonwealth, the Organization of American States, the European Union, and The Carter Center has called for the transparent tabulation of results for Region 4 be resumed in order to proceed to the establishment of national results.
The observer groups said until this occurs, the result of these elections cannot be credibly declared.
