Skip to main content

FM
Former Member

report on May 11 polls

Carter Centre urges GECOM to release election data; issues preliminary report on May 11 polls

May 28, 2015 4:50 pm Category: latest news A+ / A-
 
 
Carter Centre observers.

Carter Centre observers.

[www.inewsguyana.com]

 

The Carter Centre which observed the 2015 General and Regional Elections in Guyana has issued its preliminary report which focuses on issues relating to the conduct of polls.

The preliminary report provides a slew of recommendations for both the Government of Guyana and the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) to implement and allow for the smooth process of elections.

Read the statement in full below:

 

Voting. There was a generally calm and peaceful atmosphere during election day, and Carter Center observers assessed procedures positively at all stations observed, with no major irregularities reported. Polling staff at stations observed were well-trained, and voting progressed with very few technical errors and in a manner that protected the integrity of the vote.

 

Counting. 

Carter Center observers reported that ballot reconciliation and the completion of Statements of Polls (SoPs) generally adhered to procedures in polling stations visited, and party agents and citizen observers were invited to sign and receive copies of the results. However, the atmosphere during the counting period became anxious in some areas of the country, and several incidents were reported in Georgetown, where crowds gathered around polling stations, which contributed to a delay in the transfer of some electoral materials and processing of results. The Guyana Elections Commission and the police coordinated a response to facilitate the transfer of materials.

Post-election Period. After May 11, Carter Center observers continued to observe the transmission and tabulation of results at all levels, including the central tabulation process in Georgetown, with observers providing a presence 24 hours a day. Carter Center observers were not limited in their access to the data-entry rooms of GECOM.  The Center learned, and GECOM acknowledged, that some fraudulent Statements of Polls had been created and inserted into GECOM national tabulation. However, GECOM easily identified the forgeries and did not process them. Observers did not report any significant irregularities during the post-election tabulation and verification of results phases.

Carter Center staff and observers remain in Guyana and continue to consult with stakeholders and observe the post-election environment.

To the Guyana Elections Commission:

  • Release polling-station level results data. The Carter Center urges GECOM to make complete data available as quickly as possible regarding results at the polling-station level. This is a recognized international best practice that can enhance public confidence in the process and its outcome.
  • Build confidence in the voters’ list. 
  • GECOM, the registrar, and other departments of the government of Guyana should exchange accurate and complete information that will enable removal of the deceased from the voters’ list. In future elections, GECOM should take steps to allow an independent audit of the voters’ list.
  • Improve the tabulation process.While the tabulation system in Guyana is thorough, the slow pace of the process creates a vacuum of information that fuels suspicion and mistrust. Guyana should consider a full review of tabulation procedures, possibly including steps such as a double-blind data-entry system to enhance accuracy and confidence. Improved tabulation procedures and timely dissemination of information will increase trust in the overall process.
  • Improve accessibility for voters with disabilities.Many polling stations are difficult for voters with disabilities to access, requiring persons to navigate stairs, bridges, or narrow passageways. Although The Carter Center was informed that portable ramps would be provided to polling stations, observers did not see any. Tactile ballot guides are a great asset to elections in Guyana, and steps should be taken for future elections to ensure their full distribution, with voter education campaigns to inform voters of their use. Polling officials should also be trained on how the tactile ballot guide is to be used.
  • Location of polling stations. Because of the lack of state establishments in some areas, 166 of Guyana’s 2,299 polling stations are located in private buildings and residences. While the establishment of polling stations on private property did not seem to negatively influence public confidence in the electoral process, GECOM should ensure that citizens can cast their ballot in a neutral environment.
  • Communication and access to information. GECOM needs to review its policy on access to information and on the openness of GECOM commissioners’ meetings. Ideally these should be open to media and observers. In any case, agendas should be published well in advance and decisions should be made public.

To the government of Guyana:

  • Election administration reform.Guyana should consider reforms that would reduce the politicized composition of GECOM and move toward an election management body with a structure, composition, and operations that are more consistent with international good practice and obligations, ensuring the independence and impartiality of the election management body.
  • Consolidation of the electoral law.The consolidation of existing electoral law, which at present has to be established across a plethora of legal instruments, would enhance both the clarity and the certainty of the legal rules. In addition, the laws of Guyana, including those that pertain to elections, should be made more readily available and easily accessible to citizens.
  • Fixed and zippered party lists. Consideration should be given to electoral reform efforts that would ensure candidate placement on party lists is fixed, increasing the links between citizens and elected officials and strengthening Guyana’s democratic foundations. Consideration should also be given to ensuring that party lists are “zippered” so that women and men are listed alternately on the list.
  • Right to be a candidate and the freedom of association.Guyana should reconsider the barring of independent candidates from standing for office, as it undermines international commitments on the freedom of association and the right to stand for elections. Consideration should be given to amending Article 156 of the constitution that gives political parties the power to remove a member of the National Assembly if they no longer support the party, which limits the freedom of association.
  • Allow voting for political party agents and domestic observers. Consideration should be given to ensuring that political party agents and domestic observers are able to play their critical roles in increasing the transparency of the electoral process without sacrificing their right to vote when they are stationed at polls where they are not on the voters’ list. To this end, reform should focus on allowing agents to vote in the polling stations where they are deployed.
  • Campaign finance. Establish legislation to introduce greater transparency into the sources of funding of political parties through reforms such as requiring disclosure of sources, not just in the context of elections; establishing party finance regulations with clear, rigorous, and enforceable regulations for reporting; requiring electoral contestants to make reports on their campaign expenditures publicly available, with strong penalties for those who do not comply with regulations. In addition, Guyana should consider establishing and enforcing realistic limits on campaign expenditures to help promote equity and avoid inequalities in access to resources, which undermine the democratic process.
  • Registration of political parties. The government should consider establishing a formal process for the registration and regulation of political parties to ensure greater transparency and integrity.
  • Code of conduct for political parties.While a code of conduct for political parties exists, the timeframe for its execution does little to improve the overall campaign environment. Unfortunately, the code of conduct was not signed until less than two weeks before election day, and more than two weeks after nomination day, limiting its ability to play a role during the majority of the campaign period. In future elections, the Code of Conduct for Political Parties should be signed much earlier in the process, and it should include a clear and strong enforcement mechanism.
  • Local government elections.Guyana has not held local government elections since 1994, and the repercussions for development and the ability of government to serve its people are visible at the local level throughout the coastal region. The government should recommit to holding local government elections utilizing the legislation that was approved in the last parliament as the foundation for a new consensus law.
  • Boundary delimitation. The distribution of electors per regional seat in the general elections is unequal. All districts deviate from the average of person-per-seat by more than 15 percent, a maximum advised by international best practice. The Carter Center recommends that the parliament amend legislation to address inequalities in geographical constituencies to ensure greater respect for the obligation of equal suffrage. In any case, the apportionment of the seats to the regions should be based on the latest available population statistics.

To Political Parties:

  • Cooperation.Guyana must move beyond divisive politics, and its parties must find a way to work together constructively for the good of the country. While the political system enables a vigilant and energetic opposition, there must be a level of strategic cooperation to ensure that the state can perform its basic functions and regular local government elections can be held. The institutions of the state should not be held hostage to continuing cycles of inter-party conflict.
  • Representation. Political parties should reevaluate their structure to ensure that they are well positioned to play their role in representing their supporters in government. Political party leaders appear out of touch with many Guyanese, limiting the effectiveness of the political elite in representing Guyana’s citizenry. All parties should strengthen their internal democracy and make their operating procedures more transparent.

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Is GECOM willing to submit those Ballots and SOPs for scrutiny? Will the New Govt even consider allowing that?

 

Can the country at this time heed Carter's Call re: Carter Centre urges GECOM to release election data:

FM

PPP moves to High Court for release of election information

May 28, 2015 4:13 pm Category: latest news A+ / A-

By Jomo Paul

Former President, Donald Ramotar flanked by Party members. [iNews' Photo]

Former President, Donald Ramotar flanked by Party members. [iNews’ Photo]

[www.inewsguyana.com]
 
The People’s Progressive Party (PPP) has moved to the High Court in a motion to have the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) release detailed information regarding the results o the May 11 General and Regional elections.

 

This was confirmed by PPP Executive Member Gail Teixeira who spoke to iNews on Thursday afternoon. The motion indicates that the PPP wants “An Order of Rule or Nisi of Mandamus” to be granted to the PPP which would compel the Chief Elections Officer (CEO), Keith Lowenfield to provide the Party with the results of the 2015 General and Regional elections in an aggregate form.

The Party also wants the reports from the Information Technology Department of GECOM relative to the conduct of polls and tabulation on May 11.

Interestingly also, the PPP is requesting copies of statements of poll from each of the 2299 polling stations that were utilized on elections day.

The motion was filed by the PPP’s Election Agent Ganga Persaud under the representation of former Attorney General, Anil Nandlall. In the document, it is stated that the Party has resorted to move to the courts since written requests to the CEO proved futile.

When probed, Teixeira told iNews that the document was not linked to the petition which the Party has promised to file in the courts contesting the results of the elections.

While the PPP has not accepted the results of the 2015 polls, the International community has said the Party should accept that it was defeated and represent the 202,000 persons that voted for them in the elections.

FM
Originally Posted by asj:

Seeing some problems here if the court rules in PPP/C Favor.

I would suggest that GECOM move to the HIGH court with a counter action demanding the PPP to release all of its SOP to see if the PPP has any FAKE SOPs.

FM

There won't be any problems. The results were declared. A review won't result in forcing a sitting government to hand over the reigns. The constitution does not cover that, and if it isn't in the constitution then nothing can be done to force the coalition out of office.

Mr.T
Originally Posted by Georgie:
Originally Posted by asj:

Seeing some problems here if the court rules in PPP/C Favor.

I would suggest that GECOM move to the HIGH court with a counter action demanding the PPP to release all of its SOP to see if the PPP has any FAKE SOPs.

Good Point, I would agree with this.

FM
Originally Posted by asj:
Originally Posted by Georgie:
Originally Posted by asj:

Seeing some problems here if the court rules in PPP/C Favor.

I would suggest that GECOM move to the HIGH court with a counter action demanding the PPP to release all of its SOP to see if the PPP has any FAKE SOPs.

Good Point, I would agree with this.

Thank you.

 

Can some one now pass this message on to BOUISE BRAIN Keith Lowenfield?

 

 

FM
Originally Posted by VishMahabir:

Georgie....ARE YOU FOR REAL??? Did you read the release? GECOM conducted the elections, they need to certify its credibility, not the PPP.Foolish.

The PPP is the alligator, they need to carry the BURDEN of PROOF.

 

Any mad man can walk down the road and say  - YOU Vish tief my gold chain.

 

WHERE is the proof?

FM

In the absence of corroboration, the credibility of the PPP became the critical factor.  How does the PPP demonstrates its CREDIBILITY if not by providing PROOF?

 

This is now LAW.

FM

I am at a loss, when originally we had APNU/AFC leading with with about 5,000 plus votes and then coming down to the final report we heard that APNU/AFC pulls it off by 4,000 plus votes.

Was there a recheck done to give PPP/C more votes? Can't say for sure now.

FM

OK, I agree that the PPP must show their hand. However, GECOM is responsible for conducting the election and showing that its been a free and fair process.  They must come clean also and release allthe information. That information can be used for research and for correcting problems in the future. The Carter Center is calling for the release also. In fact, a court petition is asking for just that. It does not have to go that far. The PPP did say that they will accept a loss if all the information is released and the results confirm they loss.     

V
Originally Posted by Georgie:

In the absence of corroboration, the credibility of the PPP became the critical factor.  How does the PPP demonstrates its CREDIBILITY if not by providing PROOF?

 

This is now LAW.

Georgie, I still do not get PPP/C argument, are they saying that since they got back a 1000 plus votes, similarly they can say that there are  errors of more such votes?

I do not know if this is their argument.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by Georgie:

I was told the results were managed to some extend but not enough to over turn the APNUAFC victory.

And this is OK??? Dont get me wrong Georgie boy...I dont think this will change the outcome, but it will begin the healing process.  

V

Vincent Alexander

Vincent Alexander

PPP/C objections ‘not based on concrete evidence’ – GECOM Commissioner

 

CONCRETE evidence to support the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) contention of irregularities in the electoral process was not provided to the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), according to one of its Commissioners, Mr Vincent Alexander.In a letter to the press, he said, “It is true that the PPP/C sought to question approximately 34 Statements of Poll (SoPs) in the case of District 4, but in no instance did they present original statements of polls as the basis for their contention.

Mohamood Shaw

Mohamood Shaw

“They presented a spreadsheet, which purportedly reflected the statements of polls in the PPPC`s possession. In the specific case of District 4, they made those objections on Thursday through Friday (May 14 and 15) and were requested to produce the evidence by Saturday, May 16. They returned to the verification process on May 16 without the original Statements of Polls, thus leaving the RO with no alternative, but make the declaration since the objection was not based on concrete evidence.” Alexander’s letter follows a statement signed by three GECOM Commissioners – Mohamood Shaw, Athmaram Mangar and Sase Gunraj – who detailed several attempts to have a number of irregularities discovered in the electoral process addressed, attempts they contended proved futile. PROCESS EXPLAINED In detailing the process of a final declaration of election results, he explained that, “[Some] 2299 results were to be determined at the places of poll and documented on statements of poll, copies of which were to be made available, immediately after the count, to the Presiding Officer, the Assistant Presiding Officer, the Counting Officer and the parties’ agents. Also, a copy was to be posted outside of the related polling station and enveloped copies sent to the Returning Officer (RO) via the Deputy Returning Officer and likewise a copy sent to the Chief Elections Officer (CEO), Mr Keith Lowenfield. “…two parallel counts were to be conducted: a count at the level of each RO, for the purpose of 10 district/regional/constituency declarations and a count by the Information Technology (IT) unit after the statements bound for the CEO would have been delivered to GECOM, signed off on by at least two present Commissioners and transmitted to IT for tabulation, after which they should have been transmitted to the CEO`s office for custodial purposes. “The CEO informed the Commission of his intention to conduct an independent tabulation, once the statements were delivered to his office, thus allowing him a comparator relative to the IT tabulation and the eventually submitted 10 declarations. The 10 declarations were to be used as the bases for the CEO`s summative count; the calculation of the allocation of seats; and the presentation of a report to the Commission, for its approval, prior to the final declaration of results and allocation of seats. On these bases,Alexander refuted claims that there were material irregularities in the system. “I am verily informed that this process was followed and am unaware of any complaint in that regard, from any quarter. The most critical point to note is that the three most relevant authorities (ROs, the CEO and the parties) should have been in possession of the original and identical statements of poll,” he said.

Athmaram Mangar

Athmaram Mangar

FAKE SoPs DISCOVERED On the question of the discovery of falsified SoPs, Alexander explained that it was the Chief Elections Officer who made the discovery and took measures to address the problem. He said, “Those statements were supposedly received, opened and recorded by Logistics; were signed off on by Commissioners; and data entered by IT before being delivered to the CEO. The CEO discovered documents that were not original documents. He also observed a disparity with the results on those documents as well as he observed some statements on which the votes cast were in excess of the divisional electoral rolls…on one hand, it was decided that he would abandon the use of statements of poll. “…in relation to what actually occurred, there has been no evidence or complaint that the statements of poll, which were delivered to the ROs, were corrupted. Each RO conducted a verification that involved the political parties and in no instance did the statements of poll used by the RO and those in the possession of the parties not correspond. …GECOM verified that it had not used the falsified results and that there was no difference between what GECOM used and what was recorded on the statements of poll presented by the PPP/C.” IMMATERIAL TO DECLARATION Notably, the PPP/C, in addition to the falsified SoPs, have raised objections to the refusal of GECOM to have public vetting of polling-day staffers, many of whom were discovered to be activists of the political Opposition; misdirection by some GECOM staffers who advised voters; damaged stamps that saw some ballots not being properly stamped; the fact that persons without identification cards were allowed to vote, even though their images did not match those in the files of GECOM staff; and denying proxy holders the use of their proxies, among others.

Sase Gunraj

Sase Gunraj

Recounts were requested before and after the official declarations were made, but these were rejected. Also denied was the PPP/C request for the SoPs, Tally Sheets and a breakdown of results of each Polling Division or ballot boxes. Additionally, on May 20, Gunraj wrote in his capacity as a GECOM Commissioner, to Mr Lowenfield to request several things, including the: * Results from each Electoral District, disaggregated by Polling Division, as compiled by the Chief Elections Officer; * Results from each Electoral District, disaggregated by Polling Division, as compiled by the Returning Officer of each Electoral District; * Report from the Information Technology Department, disaggregated by Polling Station; * Photocopies and/or electronic copies of Statements of Poll of each Polling Station, as submitted to the Chief Elections Officer; and * Photocopies and/or electronic copies of Statements of Poll of each Polling Station, as submitted to the Returning Officer of each Electoral District. According to him, the Chief Elections Officer responded the next day, May 21. “The Chief Elections Officer acknowledges receipt of the correspondence and stated that he requires the consent of the Commission to release the requested information,” the Commissioner said. However, according to Alexander, these requests made are “immaterial” to the declaration of the 2015 election results. “It should also be noted that the information requested on May 20th is immaterial to the declaration…for all intents and purposes, the CEO produced electronic results based on the uncorrupted and verified information, which he obtained from the ROs; and the manual report in the form of the actual district reports,” he declared. GO TO COURT All considered, he advised that the PPP/C move to the courts to raise its objections. “The PPP/C or, as a matter of fact, any contestant has only one recourse at this time, which is to the court,” Alexander said. The PPP/C is currently compiling documentation to support the filing of an election petition to challenge the 2015 election results in the High Court.

By Vanessa Narine

FM
Originally Posted by alena06:

Why does GECOM not disclose the data if they think the process was transparent? Interesting developments.

they is ashamed when they find all the fake SOP the ppp try to smuggle in 

FM

Doesn't look like Surujbally and Lowenfield are computer smart.  Even though they do not have to do the work it would help to have someone at the top with computer skills to direct the sanitization of the voters list.  It should not be that difficult to do.  These guys work full time, correct?

FM
Originally Posted by asj:

I am at a loss, when originally we had APNU/AFC leading with with about 5,000 plus votes and then coming down to the final report we heard that APNU/AFC pulls it off by 4,000 plus votes.

Was there a recheck done to give PPP/C more votes? Can't say for sure now.

 

* Guyana has a new government. I have accepted that. But in the interest of fairness GECOM must release the election data. If they don't, the perception among 49% of the Guyana electorate would be they are hiding something.

 

Rev

FM

Carter Center urges electoral, other reforms

-says political party leaders appear out of touch with Guyanese

Following its lauding of voting at the May 11th general elections, the Carter Center today issued a detailed preliminary statement calling for reform of the elections commission, campaign financing laws and urging the political parties here to reevaluate their structures as their leaders appear out of touch with Guyanese.

 

The statement issued by the Center follows:

 

GEORGETOWN, GUYANA — The Carter Center today released its final preliminary statement on Guyana’s May 11 general and regional elections.

 

cartercenter-e1363075288977The Center’s key findings include:

 

  • There was a generally calm and peaceful atmosphere during election day, and Carter Center observers assessed procedures positively at all stations observed, with no major irregularities reported. Polling staff at stations observed were well-trained, and voting progressed with very few technical errors and in a manner that protected the integrity of the vote.

 

  • Carter Center observers reported that ballot reconciliation and the completion of Statements of Polls (SoPs) generally adhered to procedures in polling stations visited, and party agents and citizen observers were invited to sign and receive copies of the results. However, the atmosphere during the counting period became anxious in some areas of the country, and several incidents were reported in Georgetown, where crowds gathered around polling stations, which contributed to a delay in the transfer of some electoral materials and processing of results. The Guyana Elections Commission and the police coordinated a response to facilitate the transfer of materials.

 

  • Post-election Period. After May 11, Carter Center observers continued to observe the transmission and tabulation of results at all levels, including the central tabulation process in Georgetown, with observers providing a presence 24 hours a day. Carter Center observers were not limited in their access to the data-entry rooms of GECOM. 
  • The Center learned, and GECOM acknowledged, that some fraudulent Statements of Polls had been created and inserted into GECOM national tabulation.
  • However, GECOM easily identified the forgeries and did not process them. Observers did not report any significant irregularities during the post-election tabulation and verification of results phases.

 

Carter Center staff and observers remain in Guyana and continue to consult with stakeholders and observe the post-election environment. The Center’s full statement, available here, provides a number of recommendations to improve future elections:

 

To the Guyana Elections Commission:

 

  • Release polling-station level results data. The Carter Center urges GECOM to make complete data available as quickly as possible regarding results at the polling-station level. This is a recognized international best practice that can enhance public confidence in the process and its outcome.

 

  • Build confidence in the voters’ list. GECOM, the registrar, and other departments of the government of Guyana should exchange accurate and complete information that will enable removal of the deceased from the voters’ list. In future elections, GECOM should take steps to allow an independent audit of the voters’ list.

 

  • Improve the tabulation process. While the tabulation system in Guyana is thorough, the slow pace of the process creates a vacuum of information that fuels suspicion and mistrust. Guyana should consider a full review of tabulation procedures, possibly including steps such as a double-blind data-entry system to enhance accuracy and confidence. Improved tabulation procedures and timely dissemination of information will increase trust in the overall process.

 

  • Improve accessibility for voters with disabilities. Many polling stations are difficult for voters with disabilities to access, requiring persons to navigate stairs, bridges, or narrow passageways. Although The Carter Center was informed that portable ramps would be provided to polling stations, observers did not see any. Tactile ballot guides are a great asset to elections in Guyana, and steps should be taken for future elections to ensure their full distribution, with voter education campaigns to inform voters of their use. Polling officials should also be trained on how the tactile ballot guide is to be used.

 

  • Location of polling stations. Because of the lack of state establishments in some areas, 166 of Guyana’s 2,299 polling stations are located in private buildings and residences. While the establishment of polling stations on private property did not seem to negatively influence public confidence in the electoral process, GECOM should ensure that citizens can cast their ballot in a neutral environment.

 

  • Communication and access to information.GECOM needs to review its policy on access to information and on the openness of GECOM commissioners’ meetings. Ideally these should be open to media and observers. In any case, agendas should be published well in advance and decisions should be made public.

 

To the government of Guyana:

 

  • Election administration reform. Guyana should consider reforms that would reduce the politicized composition of GECOM and move toward an election management body with a structure, composition, and operations that are more consistent with international good practice and obligations, ensuring the independence and impartiality of the election management body.

 

  • Consolidation of the electoral law. The consolidation of existing electoral law, which at present has to be established across a plethora of legal instruments, would enhance both the clarity and the certainty of the legal rules. In addition, the laws of Guyana, including those that pertain to elections, should be made more readily available and easily accessible to citizens.

 

  • Fixed and zippered party lists. Consideration should be given to electoral reform efforts that would ensure candidate placement on party lists is fixed, increasing the links between citizens and elected officials and strengthening Guyana’s democratic foundations. Consideration should also be given to ensuring that party lists are “zippered” so that women and men are listed alternately on the list.

 

  • Right to be a candidate and the freedom of association. Guyana should reconsider the barring of independent candidates from standing for office, as it undermines international commitments on the freedom of association and the right to stand for elections. Consideration should be given to amending Article 156 of the constitution that gives political parties the power to remove a member of the National Assembly if they no longer support the party, which limits the freedom of association.

 

  • Allow voting for political party agents and domestic observers. Consideration should be given to ensuring that political party agents and domestic observers are able to play their critical roles in increasing the transparency of the electoral process without sacrificing their right to vote when they are stationed at polls where they are not on the voters’ list. To this end, reform should focus on allowing agents to vote in the polling stations where they are deployed.

 

  • Campaign finance. Establish legislation to introduce greater transparency into the sources of funding of political parties through reforms such as requiring disclosure of sources, not just in the context of elections; establishing party finance regulations with clear, rigorous, and enforceable regulations for reporting; requiring electoral contestants to make reports on their campaign expenditures publicly available, with strong penalties for those who do not comply with regulations. In addition, Guyana should consider establishing and enforcing realistic limits on campaign expenditures to help promote equity and avoid inequalities in access to resources, which undermine the democratic process.

 

  • Registration of political parties. The government should consider establishing a formal process for the registration and regulation of political parties to ensure greater transparency and integrity.

 

  • Code of conduct for political parties. While a code of conduct for political parties exists, the timeframe for its execution does little to improve the overall campaign environment. Unfortunately, the code of conduct was not signed until less than two weeks before election day, and more than two weeks after nomination day, limiting its ability to play a role during the majority of the campaign period.In future elections, the Code of Conduct for Political Parties should be signed much earlier in the process, and it should include a clear and strong enforcement mechanism.

 

  • Local government elections. Guyana has not held local government elections since 1994, and the repercussions for development and the ability of government to serve its people are visible at the local level throughout the coastal region. The government should recommit to holding local government elections utilizing the legislation that was approved in the last parliament as the foundation for a new consensus law.

 

  • Boundary delimitation. The distribution of electors per regional seat in the general elections is unequal. All districts deviate from the average of person-per-seat by more than 15 percent, a maximum advised by international best practice. The Carter Center recommends that the parliament amend legislation to address inequalities in geographical constituencies to ensure greater respect for the obligation of equal suffrage. In any case, the apportionment of the seats to the regions should be based on the latest available population statistics.

 

To Political Parties:

 

  • Guyana must move beyond divisive politics, and its parties must find a way to work together constructively for the good of the country. While the political system enables a vigilant and energetic opposition, there must be a level of strategic cooperation to ensure that the state can perform its basic functions and regular local government elections can be held. The institutions of the state should not be held hostage to continuing cycles of inter-party conflict.

 

  • Political parties should reevaluate their structure to ensure that they are well positioned to play their role in representing their supporters in government. Political party leaders appear out of touch with many Guyanese, limiting the effectiveness of the political elite in representing Guyana’s citizenry. All parties should strengthen their internal democracy and make their operating procedures more transparent.
FM
Originally Posted by Rev:
Originally Posted by asj:

I am at a loss, when originally we had APNU/AFC leading with with about 5,000 plus votes and then coming down to the final report we heard that APNU/AFC pulls it off by 4,000 plus votes.

Was there a recheck done to give PPP/C more votes? Can't say for sure now.

 

* Guyana has a new government. I have accepted that. But in the interest of fairness GECOM must release the election data. If they don't, the perception among 49% of the Guyana electorate would be they are hiding something.

 

Rev

Agreed...and this might be one of the reasons why the 49% could possibly grow to a much higher number in 2020.

alena06
Originally Posted by alena06:
Originally Posted by Rev:
Originally Posted by asj:

I am at a loss, when originally we had APNU/AFC leading with with about 5,000 plus votes and then coming down to the final report we heard that APNU/AFC pulls it off by 4,000 plus votes.

Was there a recheck done to give PPP/C more votes? Can't say for sure now.

 

* Guyana has a new government. I have accepted that. But in the interest of fairness GECOM must release the election data. If they don't, the perception among 49% of the Guyana electorate would be they are hiding something.

 

Rev

Agreed...and this might be one of the reasons why the 49% could possibly grow to a much higher number in 2020.

and you might get lucky too.

Mitwah
Originally Posted by alena06:
Originally Posted by Rev:
Originally Posted by asj:

I am at a loss, when originally we had APNU/AFC leading with with about 5,000 plus votes and then coming down to the final report we heard that APNU/AFC pulls it off by 4,000 plus votes.

Was there a recheck done to give PPP/C more votes? Can't say for sure now.

 

* Guyana has a new government. I have accepted that. But in the interest of fairness GECOM must release the election data. If they don't, the perception among 49% of the Guyana electorate would be they are hiding something.

 

Rev

Agreed...and this might be one of the reasons why the 49% could possibly grow to a much higher number in 2020.

There is a huge risk, if the PPPs' demands are met, they could come out ahead in a recount, a scenario which even Jimmy Carter does not want to contemplate.

FM
Originally Posted by Mitwah:
Originally Posted by alena06:
 

Agreed...and this might be one of the reasons why the 49% could possibly grow to a much higher number in 2020.

Mitwah: and you might get lucky too.

 

ATTN ADMIN & GNI POSTERS

 

* Why Is Mitwah sexually harassing female poster alena ?

 

* Lemme address this to amral since he owns this site---is it OK for the dirty and vulgar Mitwah to talking to a GNI female member about "getting lucky" ? This is not the first time Mitwah has used sexual connotations in addressing alena.

 

Rev

 

FM
Originally Posted by Rev:
Originally Posted by Mitwah:
Originally Posted by alena06:
 

Agreed...and this might be one of the reasons why the 49% could possibly grow to a much higher number in 2020.

Mitwah: and you might get lucky too.

 

ATTN ADMIN & GNI POSTERS

 

* Why Is Mitwah sexually harassing female poster alena ?

 

* Lemme address this to amral since he owns this site---is it OK for the dirty and vulgar Mitwah to talking to a GNI female member about "getting lucky" ? This is not the first time Mitwah has used sexual connotations in addressing alena.

 

Rev

 

Rev, may you get lucky too.

Mitwah

Ban-Ki-moon

Online petition calls for investigation into ‘claims’ of ‘rigged elections’

 

AN ONLINE petition to have the United Nations Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, Barack Obama, and Council of the European Union to investigate “claims” of rigged elections and unprofessional conduct by the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) is gaining traction.According to the petition, “The recently concluded elections in Guyana has been shrouded in controversy due to the Guyana Elections Commission inability to provide the people of Guyana with free and fair elections, and also an elections free from fear.

U.S President Barack Obama

U.S President Barack Obama

 

“Fake Statements of Poll were discovered during the verification process and until today no investigation was launched into how, when and by whom did these manufactured statements of poll with manufactured results infiltrate the commission; the employment of persons who are affiliated with certain political parties to serve as electoral staff on elections day; the refusal of recounts to a party who felt that their supporters were being disenfranchised due to discrepancies in the system. There is also need for an investigation into the role foreign powers played in this well organised and orchestrated plan to remove a Guyanese Government.” Meanwhile, Chairman of GECOM, Dr Steve Surujbally, when asked by the Guyana Chronicle, declined to comment on the matter.

 

Dr. Steve Surujbally, GECOM Chairman

Dr. Steve Surujbally, GECOM Chairman

FM

America gets rid of dictatorship all over the world.  This is what they did to Guyana. No recount means that there was rigging.  The PPP would have won and that's not what the Americans want. 

R

Add Reply

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