Day by day, more and more support is mushrooming for the CARICOM-scrutinized recount results to be declared. 

Earlier today the OAS issued yet another statement rubbishing Lowenfield's ridiculous report.

I had an open mind towards these elections. With International Observers monitoring the process I personally felt that it was going to be fair and transparent until names like Mingo and Lowenfield popped up. It became quiet apparent which side of the fence they were on. And it became very clear to me that Gecom was not an independent body as it was supposed to be. I've read countless posts here that Guyana was in the clutches of a Dictatorship but I never believed any of that until now.

@Sheik101 posted:

I had an open mind towards these elections. With International Observers monitoring the process I personally felt that it was going to be fair and transparent until names like Mingo and Lowenfield popped up. It became quiet apparent which side of the fence they were on. And it became very clear to me that Gecom was not an independent body as it was supposed to be. I've read countless posts here that Guyana was in the clutches of a Dictatorship but I never believed any of that until now.

Guyana entered dictatorship mode 3 months after Charrandass's no-confidence vote, ie March 2019 when Granger refused to call elections.

New elections unacceptable, says OAS after Lowenfield submitted his report to GECOM Chairman. 

https://www.kaieteurnewsonline...ns-unacceptable-oas/

@Former Member posted:

New elections unacceptable, says OAS after Lowenfield submitted his report to GECOM Chairman. 

https://www.kaieteurnewsonline...ns-unacceptable-oas/

Who gave the OAS the authority to dictate what's acceptable or unacceptable for Guyana?  They created a big mess in Bolivia.  

@Totaram posted:

Who gave the OAS the authority to dictate what's acceptable or unacceptable for Guyana?  They created a big mess in Bolivia.  

Who gave the PNC the right to intervene is South Africa Domestically Apartheid Policies? Why did ayuh run to the US when the Buxton terrorists got gang banged?

Guyana does not exist in a vacuum or by the law of the jungle. It is a signatory to many international conventions embracing democratic principles, human rights and the rule of law.  For this it benefits from the international institutions and trade.  It gets protection and a hearing and say in international issues. 

That gives member nations rights to have a say.  Kapeech?

All international and local organizations/groups being accredited agencies  have the right to express their opinions for elections in a country.

Groups have expressed their views since Guyana's independence in 1966.

@Totaram posted:

Who gave the OAS the authority to dictate what's acceptable or unacceptable for Guyana?  They created a big mess in Bolivia.  

Guyana is a member of the OAS. It is a signatory to the OAS Inter-American Democratic Charter. 

Article 1 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter states that “The peoples of the Americas have a right to democracy and their governments have an obligation to promote and defend it.” 

By invitation the OAS sent a team, duly accredited, to observe the 2020 elections process. That team prepared and submitted a report to OAS Secretary General. The report noted Mingo's mangling and other APNU+AFC-orchestrated moves to prevent transparent and credible counting of the Region 4 votes. The OAS views those moves as being at odds with its Charter. Hence its use of the word "unacceptable".

Guyana could be kicked out of the OAS whose 34 other member-states are also in the United Nations and can press for UN sanctions against Guyana under APNU+AFC rule.

@Former Member posted:

Guyana is a member of the OAS. It is a signatory to the OAS Inter-American Democratic Charter. 

Article 1 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter states that “The peoples of the Americas have a right to democracy and their governments have an obligation to promote and defend it.” 

By invitation the OAS sent a team, duly accredited, to observe the 2020 elections process. That team prepared and submitted a report to OAS Secretary General. The report noted Mingo's mangling and other APNU+AFC-orchestrated moves to prevent transparent and credible counting of the Region 4 votes. The OAS views those moves as being at odds with its Charter. Hence its use of the word "unacceptable".

Guyana could be kicked out of the OAS whose 34 other member-states are also in the United Nations and can press for UN sanctions against Guyana under APNU+AFC rule.

Yes, of course , I know all that.  What I don't understand is how they could dictate what is acceptable or unacceptable for Guyana. Yes, they could kick any country out.  Big deal, they are having problems right now additional to the screw up in Bolivia.  They cost Morales his job and helped to have him thrown out of his country because he stood up for the less fortunate.  Regarding UN sanctions:  my understanding is that these could only be imposed by the Security Council where any one member has a veto.  Guess what would happen there? 

@Totaram posted:

Yes, of course , I know all that.  What I don't understand is how they could dictate what is acceptable or unacceptable for Guyana. Yes, they could kick any country out.  Big deal, they are having problems right now additional to the screw up in Bolivia.  They cost Morales his job and helped to have him thrown out of his country because he stood up for the less fortunate.  Regarding UN sanctions:  my understanding is that these could only be imposed by the Security Council where any one member has a veto.  Guess what would happen there? 

It's not only the OAS that the APNU+AFC regime is facing. CARICOM, the 53-nation Commonwealth, plus the ABC and EU states are on the same page as the OAS. All can bring their votes to bear in the UN. And isolation would be detrimental to APNU+AFC rule.

@Totaram posted:

Yes, of course , I know all that.  What I don't understand is how they could dictate what is acceptable or unacceptable for Guyana. Yes, they could kick any country out.  Big deal, they are having problems right now additional to the screw up in Bolivia.  They cost Morales his job and helped to have him thrown out of his country because he stood up for the less fortunate.  Regarding UN sanctions:  my understanding is that these could only be imposed by the Security Council where any one member has a veto.  Guess what would happen there? 

The Security Council tend to shy away from sanctions when it comes to upholding democracy and promoting human rights. Sanctions are generally reserved for more serious cases involving peace and security. China may veto such sanctions. However, the more important trading partners of Guyana, US included, can impose more political and personal sanctions like trsvel bans, aset seizure, etc.   

The issue involving Bolivia will not deter the OAS one way or the other, especially when the world and observers saw what happen since the Mingo declaration. 

But at this point, the PNC does not care about any of this...the oil prize id foremost on their minds.