…after request for them to be struck out
The Chambers of the Director of Public Prosecution has agreed to review the private criminal charges filed against Chief Elections Officer, Keith Lowenfield.
The request for the review was done by attorney for Lowenfield Nigel Hughes. Hughes had written to the DPP, Shalimar Ali-Hack urging that the charges be withdrawn. He said the private prosecutors do not have sufficient evidence against Lownefield. Hughes wants the DPP to strike out the charges just as she did with those that were filed against Chairman of GECOM, Justice, Claudette Singh. When Lowenfield had first appeared in court he was granted $450,000 bail.
A PPP/C activist and others filed the criminal charges against the CEO for alleged misconduct in public office. The allegations by Desmond Morian are that Lowenfield, while performing his duties as CEO of GECOM, ascertained the results of the March 2 elections “knowing the said results to be false, the said willful misconduct amounting to a breach of the public’s trust in the Office of the Chief Elections Officer of [GECOM].” With the complaint being filed, the police now would have to investigate the matter.
The PPP/C had been furious over a report Lowenfield had submitted, which the CEO said was based on valid votes cast at the March2, 2020 elections. The report had shown the APNU+AFC coalition winning the elections by 33 seats to 31 for the PPP/C and one for the joinder party.
In justifying the report Lowenfield in a statement had said that they seem to have only read the Constitution in part conveniently and failed to recognise the sections that dictate the functions of the Chief Election Officer. He said while the Commission makes certain policy decisions and provides guidance to the Chief Election Officer for implementation by the Secretariat, “I have to execute my duties as a Constitutional Officer, particularly in the conduct of Elections.” Lowenfield said the contents of the Stabroek News article suggests that the CEO must only act as the Commission instructs and flout the Constitutional requirements. “At all times, I have acted in conformity with the laws and therefore my action cannot be “seen as clear act of insubordination” as articulated in the ill-informed Stabroek News article,” the CEO stated.
The People’s Progressive Party Civic in response had chided Lowenfield for his stance that he was acting within the confines of the constitution when he presented his report of the March 2, 2020 which contains only valid votes. The party also said that Lowenfield is subject to the direction and control of the Commission at all material times and that he has failed to do so. “That the Commission enjoys an overarching power over the entire electoral process and its officers, including the Chief Election Officer, to rectify any wrong or illegality or irregularity committed is expressed in both Article 162(1) (b) of the Constitution and Section 22 of the Election Laws Amendment Act,” the PPP/C had said.
