PNCR Executive Aubrey Norton has denied accusations that his statements about the outcome of the controversial Georgetown District Conference vote have brought the main opposition party into disrepute, warning that such claims appeared to be intended to provide the basis for bringing “spurious charges” against him.
In a letter to Party Leader Robert Corbin, dated July 1, 2009, MP Norton expressed outrage at the possibility of his comments being construed as bringing the party into disrepute and he said he would vigorously defend his position. “I wish to put you on notice that any attempt at creating another kangaroo court will be met with a rigorous legal response since it is my considered opinion that selective discipline as practised by you does harm to the party,” he declared.
Stabroek News was told that Norton had been given notice of the likelihood of disciplinary proceedings, but both he and the party have denied such reports. Corbin had threatened Norton with a libel suit if he did not retract his statements made to this newspaper about the party’s leader’s involvement in the District Conference and give an apology.
Norton, who lost the Chairmanship of the Georgetown District to party Co-Chair Volda Lawrence at the vote, has described the electoral process as fraudulent. The party has subsequently dismissed his claims as baseless and intended to bring the party into disrepute.
Last Saturday PNCR General Secretary Oscar Clarke said disciplinary proceedings had been discussed at the party’s Central Executive Committee (CEC), where it was agreed that such a course would be pursued if it was found to be warranted. Norton, who was present at the CEC meeting, would not comment on the controversy when contacted by Stabroek News yesterday, noting that he was abiding by the CEC’s agreement not to comment on the issue publicly.
Stabroek News has seen a copy of Norton’s letter to Corbin, which was copied to Clarke in his capacity as General Secretary as well as members of the CEC. “I find it outrageous that a statement of fact that I made subsequent to the elections of the Georgetown District can be construed as bringing the party into disrepute,” he said, arguing that such a characterisation could not be representative of the true situation.
He noted that he did not approach the press over the issue, explaining that he was asked to comment on the party leader’s contention that the elections had been free and fair. In this context, he explained that he merely responded to an issue that Corbin placed in the public domain. “Let it be made crystal clear that my actions were aimed at giving facts in response to your ridiculous claim that the elections were free and fair,” he said. “I believe that facts cannot bring the Party into disrepute. In fact, on the contrary, concealing the truth and continuing with a flawed electoral system in the Party is what brings it into disrepute,” he added, while questioning how the party could demand a free and fair electoral system nationally and resist similar transparency within the party.
Referring to a letter he received from Corbin, Norton said it represented the “worst form of authoritarian politics,” and “an attempt to instil fear” in him, which he said would not work.
Further, he said as a longstanding member of the party he was “troubled” by the fact that Corbin’s letter reflected “an attitude and frame of mind” which have in the past put the party at variance with some of its leaders and supporters. “There is need for a new approach in which the transparency we demand of others is practiced in our party,” he said, while questioning, “How else would we be transparent in government if we do not practice it in our party politics.”
Norton emphasised that the party needed to rid itself of “Gestapo-type” behaviour that he dubbed “anti-democratic,” adding that it stifles criticism and has no place in the democratic politics of the 21st century.
Norton’s reference to “another kangaroo court” likely alludes to the disciplinary proceedings that targeted supporters of Vincent Alexander for their conduct during his aborted campaign for leadership in the lead up to the party’s biennial congress in 2007. The disciplinary action culminated with the recall of MP James McAllister from Parliament, which prompted to the subsequent withdrawal of Alexander and a number of his backers.
Among Norton’s challenges to the integrity of the election were that there was no roll call and that some prospective voters were given more than one ballot paper.
Stabroek News was present when as the ballot papers were being distributed for the voting for chairman, chaos erupted as persons were heard shouting that they were not receiving any ballot papers while others said that some were receiving more than one ballot paper. This saw some of them jumping to their feet and engaging in shouting matches.
One man who wanted to make his voice heard stood at the microphone screaming that the process was being rigged and he suggested to Returning Officer Robert Williams that the delegates move by rows to the head table to vote instead of sharing out the ballot papers as that process was supporting rigging. “We cannot want to go to the PPP/C and talk about rigging elections when we are doing the same here, this must end now we must stop this and we must start doing things right now,” the man shouted into the microphone.
Norton and his supporters left the voting area and were overheard saying that the process was being rigged. And some persons produced ballot papers which did not have the standardised stamp at the back of them. Even before the elections some persons were openly heard voicing their objections to their names not being found on the list of delegates.
Last Saturday, Clarke told reporters that allegations of irregularities and fraud at the polls were baseless, while saying no formal complaints were made to allow for an investigation. He said “misinformation” had been placed in the public domain about the conduct of the polls and that there was no proof of any of the allegations that have surfaced. He assured that an investigation would be launched to verify any allegations which were made to him in writing.
Meanwhile, Corbin, who maintained that the results of the elections reflected the will of the electorate, described the behaviour of some members at the Conference as highly unsatisfactory. “It cannot be condoned by any respectable party,” he said, noting that there were internal mechanisms that could have been utilised to address issues raised by aggrieved members.
