Support Village Voice News With a Donation of Your Choice.
By Mark DaCosta- The long-awaited trial surrounding alleged electoral fraud during the March 2020 General and Regional elections is scheduled to recommence on November 6, 2024, under Acting Chief Magistrate Faith McGusty. The case was previously under the supervision of Senior Magistrate Leron Daly, who has been on extended sick leave, necessitating the transfer of the trial to McGusty.
During a hearing on November 1, it was disclosed that several key individuals involved in the trial are currently out of the jurisdiction. Local Government Minister Sonia Parag, who is expected to be the first witness, Special Prosecutor Darshan Ramdhani, and Defence Counsel Eusi Anderson were all absent, prompting Chief Magistrate McGusty to declare that while Chancellor of the Judiciary Yonnette Cummings-Edwards had hoped for the trial to begin immediately, it was not feasible given the circumstances. Following discussions, both sides agreed to reconvene on November 6 at 2:00.
The trial involves nine defendants, including high-profile figures such as former Chief Election Officer Keith Lowenfield, former District Four Returning Officer Clairmont Mingo, and former Deputy Chief Election Officer Roxanne Myers. They face multiple charges of conspiracy related to the alleged manipulation of election results, an accusation that has hung over them since the elections took place almost four years ago. The charges assert that from March 2 to August 2, 2020, these individuals colluded to present fraudulent votes.
Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo has expressed mounting frustration over the prolonged delays that have characterised this trial. At a recent press conference, he lamented, “I am worried about the compromising of the evidence… The judiciary gets away with not saying anything. Who is in charge?” His comments reflect a rather curious concern, given that many observers view the trial’s inertia as a political tool wielded by the ruling People’s Progressive Party (PPP) to keep opposition members entangled in legal struggles, thereby diminishing their ability to effectively challenge the government.
One analyst said that Jagdeo’s remarks are particularly striking, considering the PPP’s own history of using judicial proceedings as a means to stifle dissent. With each delay, the narrative surrounding the trial morphs further into a political witch hunt, with Jagdeo and the PPP appearing increasingly desperate to discredit their adversaries. The Vice President’s call for a swift resolution to the trial seems rather hypocritical, as the PPP has benefitted from the extended timeline, keeping opposition figures like Lowenfield and Mingo preoccupied with their legal battles, the analyst said.
Other political commentators have scrutinised the timing and nature of the trial’s delays, suggesting that they serve the PPP’s interests by diverting attention from its governance challenges. The party’s ability to maintain a façade of fighting electoral fraud is bolstered by the trial, even as public patience wears thin.
The trial has already faced numerous setbacks since its inception. Originally set in motion after the controversial elections of March 2020, which sparked protests and allegations of widespread irregularities, the proceedings have been marred by a series of postponements and complications. The previous hearing on September 17 had to be delayed due to Magistrate Daly’s absence, which was followed by further adjournments, leading to growing frustration among the public and the defendants alike.
As the new hearing date approaches, there is a palpable sense of anticipation mixed with scepticism. Chief Magistrate McGusty has indicated plans to implement measures aimed at expediting the trial process, such as the use of recording devices to document testimonies. “If something is recorded, it cannot be withdrawn, and it will make for a speedier trial,” she noted.
Yet, the effectiveness of these measures remains to be seen. The prosecution has struggled to call witnesses effectively, having managed to present only a few testimonies so far, including that of Minister Sonia Parag, whose initial statements faced complications due to procedural errors. This has raised questions about the robustness of the case against the defendants, particularly in light of Jagdeo’s professed confidence that the government possesses substantial evidence to support its claims of electoral misconduct.
Critics argue that this trial has devolved into a political theatre rather than a straightforward legal process. For many citizens, the ongoing saga serves more as a distraction than a pursuit of justice. The delays have allowed the PPP to maintain a narrative of righteousness while simultaneously preventing the opposition from regrouping and holding the government accountable for its actions, say many Guyanese.
As the November 6 date looms, all eyes will be on the proceedings, with citizens hoping for a semblance of clarity in what has become an increasingly convoluted affair.
In the end, as the trial resumes, one thing remains clear: the stakes are high, and the narrative surrounding this case will likely shape the future of our nation’s political discourse for years to come. Whether it will deliver justice or merely serve as a tool for political manipulation remains to be seen.
