The Opposition, A Partnership for National Unity and Alliance for Change (APNU+AFC), on Tuesday issued a statement on its engagement with the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM). See the text below:-
The APNU+AFC notes that Chairman of GECOM Claudette Singh last Wednesday (28th September) informed the Election Commissioners that she submitted to the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Commissioner of Police the additional lists of names provided by the Coalition of persons who were either dead or absent from Guyana on voting day, but for whom votes were cast.
As we had previously stated, APNU+AFC had dispatched a letter on 20th September 2022 to the GECOM Chair, in which we requested that the commission should:
(i) forward to the GPF and the GRO for verification all the information it received from the APNU+AFC in relation to voter impersonation;
(ii) publicly and promptly release the first set of verified reports already in its possession;.
(iii) restart and complete the internal probe, which it aborted in 2020, and publicly release its own findings;
(iv) address the implications of its findings of that probe; and
(v) publicly communicate the corrective actions it proposes and intends to take to prevent any attempts of voter impersonation in future elections.
In the letter, we added that the commission must treat this matter with the greatest possible urgency because of its critical nature to the integrity of elections.
The APNU+AFC hereby also puts the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Commissioner of Police on notice that should they fail to treat the matter with the required urgency and allow the PPP to commandeer and corrupt the process, we will expose and respond accordingly to such attempts.
Furthermore, we note that the GECOM Chair continues to insist that the commission cannot conduct an internal investigation and that “the onus was on the APNU+AFC to file an election petition to determine the validity of the allegations of unlawful acts such as voter impersonation.”
In so insisting, the GECOM Chair continues to mislead the public (deliberately, in our view) over the difference between the objectives of an election petition and the objectives of a systems and operations review. A petition is a judicial process to determine breaches of the law. Its only focus is on legality. On the other hand, systems and operations review are administrative exercises to detect and remove shortfalls in organisational effectiveness. Its only focus is on functionality.
Additional press statements from GECOM and more rubbish from the PPP will not change those basic facts.
