@Totaram posted:

And, to answer someone seeking the ethical grounding of the alleged Coalition's desperate move to right the results:  go and read about consequentialist ethics and then we could have a discussion.

THERE IT IS! THERE IS THE REASON WHY GRANGER LOST! THE ARROGANCE!

You might as well have said that the rest of us are too stupid to understand why the PNC tried to pull off a power heist. "That the PNC is the smartest and knows whats best. Don't dare question our actions. We are the rightful rulers."

After all this is why they have challenged every election the PPP won indicating that an election is only free and fair if the PNC won.

Forget the statistical analysis that sentence said it all.

@Locutus posted:

Um.....I think they have. The election petition challenging the legitimacy of the elections was denied by the courts.

And appealed..

@Django posted:

@Locutus do you have any detailed results for each Electoral Divisions for 2011, 2015 and 2020 Elections ?

I don't. Then again I am not claiming electoral fraud. I don't need to prove a negative.

@Locutus posted:

THERE IT IS! THERE IS THE REASON WHY GRANGER LOST! THE ARROGANCE!

You might as well have said that the rest of us are too stupid to understand why the PNC tried to pull off a power heist. "That the PNC is the smartest and knows whats best. Don't dare question our actions. We are the rightful rulers."

After all this is why they have challenged every election the PPP won indicating that an election is only free and fair if the PNC won.

Forget the statistical analysis that sentence said it all.

Is this your understanding of consequentialist ethics?

@Locutus posted:

I don't. Then again I am not claiming electoral fraud. I don't need to prove a negative.

Ok thanks.

The information is there ,which proves there are skulduggery in 2015 and 2020 Elections .From the information there isn't major percentage crossover votes from APNU/AFC to PPP/C in 2015 and 2020 Elections .

Mingo, Lawrence and Joseph to go on trial from August 27

The trial of embattled Region Four (Demerara-Mahaica) Returning Officer Clairmont Mingo, Chairperson of the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) Volda Lawrence, and APNU/AFC’s activist Carol Joseph-Smith who are accused of electoral fraud will commence on August 27, 2021, before Chief Magistrate Ann McLennan at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts.

Back in April, the Chief Magistrate ruled in favour of submissions by the prosecution for the charges against the trio to be disposed of summarily. The prosecution has already made full disclosure of statements to the defendants.

The first charge alleged that on March 5, 2020, with intent to defraud, Lawrence and Mingo uttered a report purporting to be a true declaration of all votes cast in District Four for the March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections, knowing same to be forged.

It is further alleged that on March 13, 2020, Mingo and Joseph uttered a forged document purporting to be a true report of all votes cast in the March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections, knowing that the report was forged. It is also alleged that on the said date, Joseph conspired with Mingo and others to declare a fraudulent count of votes for District Four.

Over the past week, the Guyana Police Force filed an additional charge against Mingo, Chief Elections Officer (CEO) Keith Lowenfield, and Deputy Chief Elections Officer (DCEO) Roxanne Myers. The case will be called again on June 29, 2021, before Principal Magistrate Sherdel Isaacs-Marcus at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts.

That charge states that between March 2, 2020, and August 2, 2020, at Georgetown, Lowenfield, Mingo, and Myers conspired with each other and together with Lawrence; Smith-Joseph; Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Elections Officer Sherfern February; GECOM’s Information Technology Officer Enrique Livan and GECOM clerks Denise Bobb-Cummings and Michelle Miller, and others, to defraud the electors of Guyana by declaring a false account of votes cast for the Regional Elections of March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections.

Besides this, Lowenfield is facing three counts of misconduct in public office and three counts of forgery concerning the National Elections. Mingo is facing three counts of misconduct in public office. Myers, on the other hand, has been slapped with two charges for misconduct in public office.

In February, Senior Magistrate Leron Daly ruled that a Preliminary Inquiry (PI) will be conducted into the two counts of misconduct in public office against the DCEO to decide whether there is sufficient evidence for the matters to be tried at the High Court in Demerara. The prosecution, at that time, signalled its intention of challenging the Magistrate’s decision in the High Court.

Given the magnitude of the allegations levelled against Mingo, Myers, Lawrence, Joseph, and Lowenfield, their lawyers are of the view that the High Court would be the best forum for the matters. There are also electoral fraud charges against Bob-Cummings, Miller, February, and Livan.

All those charged have been released on monetary bail pending their trial.

Earlier this month, three PPP/C GECOM Commissioners who are all Attorneys-at-Law tabled motions before GECOM’s Chairperson, Retired Justice Claudette Singh for the dismissal of Lowenfield and Myers. Justice Singh has since written to both Lowenfield and Myers asking them to provide, in writing, responses to the motion indicating why they should not be dismissed from their substantive posts. They have until June 15 to do so.

Lowenfield’s report claimed that the APNU/AFC coalition garnered 171,825 votes while the PPP/C gained 166,343 votes. How he arrived at those figures is still unknown. The certified results from the recount exercise supervised by GECOM and a high-level team from the Caribbean Community (Caricom) pellucidly showed that the PPP/C won with 233,336 votes while the coalition garnered 217,920.

The recount exercise also proved that Mingo heavily inflated the figures in Region Four – Guyana’s largest voting District – in favour of the then caretaker APNU/AFC regime. The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Shalimar Ali-Hack, SC, has hired a team of lawyers to prosecute these electoral fraud cases on the State’s behalf.

AG calls for greater swiftness in pace of electoral fraud cases at Magistrates’ Courts

Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister Anil Nandlall, SC, has expressed concern over the pace that the Magistrates’ Courts in Georgetown in dealing with the dozens of electoral fraud charges that were filed against several former Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) officials and political activists over their involvement in attempts to sway the results of the March 2020 General and Regional Elections.

“I have expressed my concern about the pace at which these cases are being dealt with in the Magistrates’ Court, or the lack of pace,” Nandlall disclosed during this week’s edition of his programme, Issues In The News.

Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister Anil Nandlall, SC

Stemming from the March 2, 2020 elections, some 32 electoral fraud cases have been filed in the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts against several political activists including APNU/AFC’s Volda Lawrence and GECOM officials including former Chief Elections Officer (CEO) Keith Lowenfield, his Deputy Roxanne Myers and embattled Region Four Returning Officer Clairmont Mingo.

Most of these charges were filed in late 2020 and early 2021.

According to Nandlall, he did not raise his concerns in the past because he wanted to allow the system to work but nearly two years later, those matters are still languishing in the court system.

“I’ve had conversations with the DPP (Director of Public Prosecutions, Shalimar Ali-Hack) and the report is that Magistrates within the system are not proceeding with the matter with the seriousness and the expediency with which they should, having regard to the importance of the matter and having regard to the length of time that the matters are pending before them.”

“Magistrates have made applications to recuse themselves and some are simply not determining whether the case should be tried summarily, meaning in the Magistrate’s Court, or should be taken indictably before a Judge and a jury. That’s a decision that Magistrates have to make. It’s a procedural decision that has to be made to determine how the cases will move forward [but] Magistrates have not been making that decision. One Magistrate has made the decision that the matter be taken indictably and that particular matter is being appealed. But that is only one charge out of 32,” the AG contended.

Nandlall went on to outline that these matters are of utmost importance to Guyana and its people since the charges on which they are predicated, are grave and serious. He noted that when such alleged acts are committed, then it is the State of Guyana that is under attack and therefore, the State has a responsibility to ensure, in this case particularly, that the charges brought are heard and determined within reasonable time and in accordance with evidence and the applicable law.

To this end, the Attorney General disclosed that he has requested the Director of Public Prosecutions, whose office is prosecuting these matters, to push for the cases to be treated with the type of seriousness and alacrity warranted.

In the same breath, however, Nandlall clarified that by doing this, he is in no way stepping over any boundaries. He pointed out that as Legal Affairs Minister and Attorney General, he is answerable for matters in the justice sector and therefore, has a responsibility to speak out when cases are not being processed, heard and determined within a reasonable time as they deserve.

“I hope that what I say here is not twisted and misinterpreted to mean that I’m being unduly critical to any Magistrate or that I’m ascribing improper motive to any Magistrate or that I’m bringing the administration of justice into disrepute or that I’m trying to in any form or fashion influence the outcome of any case because I am doing no such thing. And I want to make that abundantly clear. I’m expressing views that I’m duty bound to express as the Minister positioned where I am,” AG Nandlall asserted.

Nevertheless, the election fraud cases were called up last month and have been adjourned until October 6.

Given the seriousness of these cases, the DPP Office has recruited several private legal practitioners to prosecute the matters. The case for the prosecution is being led by Darshan Ramdhani, QC, while Senior Counsel John Jeremie and Attorneys-at-Law Nigel Hughes, Ronald Daniels, Konyo Sandiford, Eusi Anderson, and Latoya Roberts are appearing on behalf of the three accused persons.

Lowenfield is facing three counts of forgery and three counts of misconduct in public office, while Mingo and Myers are facing separate charges for misconduct in public office.

Lowenfield’s election report claimed that the APNU/AFC coalition garnered 171,825 votes while the PPP/C gained 166,343 votes.

How he arrived at those figures is still unknown, since the certified results from the recount exercise supervised by GECOM and a high-level team from the Caribbean Community (Caricom) pellucidly showed that the PPP/C won with 233,336 votes while the coalition garnered 217,920.

The recount exercise also proved that Mingo had heavily inflated the figures in Region Four—Guyana’s largest voting District, in favour of the then caretaker APNU/AFC regime.

In August 2021, GECOM voted to terminate Lowenfield, Myers, and Mingo.

The firing of these officials was met with much satisfaction by the Government, which hailed it as a step in the right direction to restoring public confidence in GECOM.  (This story was first published by the Guyana Times)

What are the raisons for the delays?

Myers to challenge testimonies at elections inquiry

Former Deputy Chief Elections Officer Roxanne Myers [Photo taken from Guyana Chronicle]

Public hearings at the Commission of Inquiry (CoI) into the March 02, 2020 elections will resume next Monday and will likely see lawyers cross-examining witnesses on behalf of former Deputy Chief Elections Officer (DCEO) Roxanne Myers.

The News Room confirmed Tuesday that Counsel from the law firm Hughes, Fields & Stoby has written the secretariat of the CoI, asking to be added to the proceedings so that persons who named Myers in their testimonies can be cross-examined.

When contacted, Secretary to the Commission Javed Shadick confirmed that the letter was received and indicated that the secretariat will respond soon.

He clarified that there are no objections to the request.

“We keep saying all the time whoever wants to come, can come. They can do so with their attorney, it doesn’t matter,” Shadick explained.

Myers has not indicated a willingness to give a statement or take the stand at the CoI just yet. The Commission has not formally invited her either.

Attorney Nigel Hughes, who is representing Myers on several electoral fraud-related charges in the Magistrate’s Court, is expected to represent her interest similarly at the CoI.

Already, several persons gave testimony before the CoI, all implicating Myers in an apparent breach of standard operating procedures. Some testified about her attempts to clear the District Four Command Center of observers and party agents, and her influence over other key election officials and members of the Guyana Police Force.

In a statement two weeks ago, the Commission’s Secretariat acknowledged that as the evidence unfolds in the inquiry, people’s reputations could be injured.

As a consequence, Chairman of the CoI, Justice of the Appeal (retired) of Turks and Caicos Stanley John has made it public that affected persons are entitled to appear before the Commission and be heard if they so desire.

“Anyone who is interested in appearing before the Commission and/or to be represented before the Commission should write to the Secretary to the Commission making that request,” a statement advised.

As the inquiry proceeds, the Secretary of the Commission will write to those persons against whom any allegation of impropriety has been made, setting out the details of the allegations and inviting such persons to appear before the Commission and providing a fair opportunity to such persons to comment on any adverse comment or allegation made against them.

The public hearings in the CoI began on Friday, November 04, 2022, and will last until January 2023.

The CoI is to determine what went wrong during the March 2020 General and Regional elections and who is culpable. The Commissioners in their report expected by March 2023 will also make recommendations for fixing Guyana’s electoral system.

Election CoI: Lowenfield continuously refused to declare results using recount figures – Gunraj testifies

…says gave victory to APNU+AFC by greater margin than was declared by Mingo

People’s Progressive Party (PPP) nominated Commissioner on the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), Sase Gunraj, on Thursday testified that former Chief Elections Officer (CEO) Keith Lowenfield had refused to follow instructions on several occasions to prepare a report using the results from the national recount exercise.

During his testimony at the ongoing Commission of Inquiry (CoI) into the events that followed the March 2, 2020 Elections, Gunraj spoke about the series of events that ensued after the March 2, 2020 polls.

He told the CoI that at the conclusion of the 33-day national recount, which ran from May 6 to June 9, 2020, the then-CEO was directed by the Elections Commission to submit a report on the outcome of that exercise. The CEO is required to present a report to the Commission, detailing the results of the elections and make a declaration of the winner.

However, Gunraj indicated that despite numerous directions from the GECOM Commission, Lowenfield refused to provide an accurate report reflecting the results of the recount.

Gunraj related that the CEO’s non-compliance with this instruction was first observed when he presented his report to the Commission on June 13, 2020.

“In that report, the CEO stated that he was unable to ascertain that the 2020 General and Regional Elections, which he oversaw, were impartial and credible,” Gunraj stated, adding that at no point prior did Lowenfield inform the Commission that he could not ascertain the credibility of those elections.

“In that report, he gave a victory to the APNU+AFC Coalition and quite interestingly, the margin of victory was even greater than that which was fraudulently declared by [Region Four Returning Officer] Clairmont Mingo.”

Earlier in this testimony, Gunraj had told the CoI that he had objected to Mingo’s declaration on March 5, 2020, which was done without the completion of the verification/tabulation of the votes for Region Four – Guyana’s largest voting district. He disclosed that there was a unanimous position at the level of the seven-member Election Commission that the process should be completed before any declaration was made. But that process was abandoned after GECOM took a decision to undertake a national recount of all the votes cast at the March 2020 polls.

Nevertheless, in Lowenfield’s June 13 report to GECOM scores of valid votes cast were invalidated by him to give a victory to the then-incumbent APNU/AFC Coalition.

“The CEO disregarded almost 300,000 votes. There were about 416,000 odd votes cast in the elections and the CEO’s report, only considered 185,000 odd votes to be valid… He would’ve disregarded just under 300,000 votes… In his explanation, he disregarded those as being not valid,” Gunraj told the CoI.

According to the GECOM Commissioner, there is no statutory authority accorded to the CEO to determine the validity of or reject any votes cast.

It was further explained that of the 185,000 votes that Lowenfield considered to be valid, he apportioned 67 per cent to the APNU/AFC, while giving the PPP/C 30.5 per cent. The CEO also claimed in his report that the APNU/AFC won District Six – the East Berbice-Corentyne region, which is primarily a PPP/C stronghold.

However, the results from the national recount showed that the PPP/C in fact won the March 2020 elections having secured a total of 233,336 votes against the 217,920 votes obtained by the APNU/AFC while another 5,214 votes went to the Joinder Alliance comprising several new and small parties that contested the elections.

That recount exercise also highlighted the fact that Mingo heavily inflated the figures in favour of the then-incumbent coalition.

According to Gunraj, that report by the CEO was rejected by a majority of the seven-member Election Commission, that is, the three PPP-nominated Commissioners along with the GECOM Chairperson, Retired Justice Claudette Singh.

Lowenfield, he added, was then directed to resubmit his report based on the actual results of the recount. He was given until June 18 by the GECOM Chair to make that submission.

But Gunraj disclosed that while a meeting of the Commission was scheduled to receive that report, two of the three APNU/AFC nominated Commissioners at GECOM were absent hence there was no quorum – which requires five members including the Chairperson and two commissioners from each side to be present.

Additionally, he informed the CoI that the CEO did not show up nor did he send the report to the Commission that day. Gunraj said no reason was proffered to the Commission for his action.

During this time, however, there was a series of court proceedings ongoing regarding the elections and following a June 22 ruling of the Guyana Court of Appeal, the Commission received another report from the CEO.

But once again in yet another report, Lowenfield went on to invalidate some 115,000 plus votes cast. That report was, however, deemed invalid by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) in a July 8, 2020 ruling.

Again, the Commission ordered the CEO to prepare another report reflecting the valid votes counted in the national recount. He was ordered to do this by July 10.

“He did not [produce that report]. Instead, he came to the Commission on that said 10th of July, 2020 and sought further guidance.”

On July 11, the Commission received a report from the CEO and that report was now using the inflated numbers declared by Mingo in March 2020.

Gunraj further told the CoI that the Elections Commission formally set aside all previous declarations on July 13 and decided that only the recount figures should be used. Once more, the Commission instructed the CEO to present another report based on the national recount figures by 14:30h the following day.

However, the CEO did not submit a report at the Commission meeting. “He was asked [about the report] and he refused to answer any questions. At that said meeting, the Commissioners on the other side, walked out of the meeting, thereby making it lose a quorum.”

That meeting was rescheduled the following day but because of another court case, the Elections Commission could not meet.

Then following a July 30, 2020 decision of the Court of Appeal, which threw out an appeal against a High Court ruling that the recount votes be used to declare the results of the March 2, 2020 elections, the Elections Commission again requested a report from the CEO.

“We reconvened a meeting of the Commission on August 2, 2020 and the CEO finally submitted a report using the actual figures from the national recount,” Gunraj told the CoI.

High Court throws out applications to block testimonies from elections COI

Dec 09, 2022 Court Stories, Features / Columnists, News --- Source --- https://www.kaieteurnewsonline...-from-elections-coi/

Kaieteur News – Justice Damone Younge has dismissed an application by three staffers of the Guyana Elections Commission seeking to block a summons by the Commissioner of Inquiry (COI) into the 2022 elections for them to appear before the panel.

The application was filed by Denise Babb-Cummings, Sheferen February and Michelle Miller  employees of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) seeking, among other things, a permanent injunction to prevent the Commission of Inquiry (COI) into the March 2020 General and Regional Elections from compelling them to give evidence.

The GECOM employees had declined to testify and invoked their right to remain when they appeared before the commission on earlier this week.

Justice Damone Younge

Denying all of the orders prayed for, and dismissing the Notice of Application by Babb-Cummings, February and Miller, Justice Younge ruled inter alia that the COI into the March 2020 General and Regional Elections is indeed a part of the State pursuant to section 2 of the COI Act.

As such, she determined the injunctive relief claimed against the Attorney General and the COI into the March 2020 General and Regional Election is refused. In any case, the case raised in the Fixed Date Application (FDA) is not appropriate for the grant of a conservatory order, the judge ruled.

Babb-Cummings, February and Miller have been charged with conspiracy to defraud the March 2020 Elections, and, on 2nd December 2022, were summoned to give evidence to the COI established by President Irfaan Ali into the March 2022 Elections.

In a FDA filed on the 5th December 2022 by Attorney, Eusi Anderson, Attorney-at-Law, against the Attorney General (the first named Respondent); and the COI established by President Irfaan Ali into the March 2020 Elections (the second named Respondent), Babb-Cummings, February and Miller sought several declaratory, and other orders, including a permanent injunction preventing the COI from compelling the attendance of anyone charged with a criminal offence related to March 2020 Elections; and damages in excess of GY$50 million, each, for the breach of the Applicants’ constitutional rights to due process, a fair trial, and the State’s willful exposure of them to self-incriminatory testimony under risk of compulsion and contempt.

In response to the Notice of Application, the  State through the Office of the Attorney General,  Anil Nandlall SC submitted that while the High Court is vested with power to grant an injunction under section 23(1) of the High Court Act, Chapter 3:02of the Laws of Guyana, sections 16 (6) and 16 (8) of the State Liability and Proceedings Act, Chapter 6:05 of the Laws of Guyana, expressly, and specifically prohibits the High Court from granting prohibitory or mandatory injunctions against the Respondents in the form of injunctive/coercive orders.

The Respondents further submitted that the COI into the 2020 General and Regional Elections is a State entity, given that it was established by the President exercising constitutionally granted supreme executive authority, and having activated section 2 of the under the Commissions of Inquiry Act Cap 19:03, Laws of Guyana.  That section provides that “The President [who] may issue a Commission appointing one or more Commissioners and authorising such Commissioner or Commissioners to inquire into any matter in which an inquiry would, in the opinion of the President, be for the public welfare.”

Carol Joseph slapped with 14 fraud charges by SOCU

Carol Smith Joseph

Carol Smith Joseph of 99 Main Street, Hopetown, West Coast Berbice was today charged by the Special Organised Crime Unit with 14 indictable charges of Fraudulent Appropriation of Property of Body Corporate committed on the Mahaica Abary Rice Development Scheme (MARDS).

She appeared at the Mahaicony Magistrate Court before Her Worship Marissa Mittleholzer where the charges were read to her.

However, she was not required to plead and was granted bail in the sum of $10,000 per charge, a total sum of $140,000. She was represented by Attorneys-at-Law Nigel Hughes and Roysdale Forde.

The cases were adjourned to January 11, 2023 for statements and June 7, 2023 for Preliminary Inquiry to commence.

During the month of March 2022, a report was made to SOCU by the MARDS Rice Milling Complex Limited, a Private Company registered under the Companies Act. Cap 89:01 of fraudulent appropriation of funds of that company by Joseph, who was a director of that company at the time.

As a result of that report, SOCU commenced investigations. During the course of the investigations, it was revealed that Joseph was appointed as a Director of MARDS between the period July 2015 and June 2018 by the then Minister of State of Guyana.

SOCU said Joseph, as a director on the Board, without authority, solely approved fourteen transactions amounting to GC $6,121,108 without the Board’s knowledge and approval between June 2016 and August 2016.

The Board makes all the policy decisions of MARDS and the duty to execute Board’s decision is done by MARDS General Manager.

Whenever payments have to be made to any suppliers or if MARDS has to do any financial transaction, approval must be given by the Board. Based on the board’s decisions to pay, the General Manager would cause the payment to be processed by his staff and two authorized signatories of MARDS must sign a cheque of payment so that it can be encashed at Republic Bank where MARDS has a Bank Account.

These amounts were used for her personal benefits and other purposes other than that of Mahaica Abary Rice Development Scheme (MARDS’S) business. These activities were in no way associated with MARDS Rice Milling Complex.
Hence she was charged.

How come only PNC people does get charged for tiefin? Dem other guys mo smart when they tief nuh?