Please permit me to respond to two very unfortunate, malicious and libellous references to me in my capacity as Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission (Gecom) and to Mr Gocool Boodoo, Chief Election Officer respectively as was published in a letter titled ‘Change for Guyana via the electoral process lies somewhere in the distant future’ in the Kaieteur News of Thursday, June 10, 2010 in the name of Mr Tacuma Ogunseye. It is important to note that the same letter was sent to the Stabroek News, but the editor of this newspaper had the good sense and the mature professionalism to edit Mr Ogunseye’s offensive remarks
Mr Ogunseye states in his letter, inter alia, “In Guyana, electoral rigging is aided and abetted by those in charge of the process (in spite of what the Chairman of Gecom says) and is still part of our political landscape. In this situation the party in government exerts tremendous influence over both the process and the officials ‘in charge of the process.’ This point is better understood when we examine the arrogance of and see the extent to which the Chief Elections Officer in Guyana disregards the existing laws in his handling of important matters that are relevant to the system.”
The protection of my personal integrity and the concomitant sustainability of the reputation of Gecom demand that I react to the accusation of Mr Ogunseye as far as I am concerned. I am certain that Mr Boodoo is quite capable of defending himself against the accusation levelled against him by Mr Ogunseye and that he will so do.
Mr Ogunseye’s unfounded contentions that “in spite of what” I say, electoral rigging is aided and abetted by those in charge of the process” implies that (i) the Guyana Elections Commission (Gecom) and its Secretariat engage in electoral rigging, (ii) I am involved in electoral rigging, and (iii) Gecom and its Secretariat take directives/diktats from the government, insofar as the conduct of elections is concerned. Nothing could be further from the truth as is clearly substantiated within the reports of all of the local and foreign organsiations that observed the 2006 General and Regional Elections.
Mr Ogunseye’s unjustifiable positions could only be interpreted as attempts to cast doubts on (i) the trustworthiness of myself and Mr Boodoo to faithfully carry out our respective responsibilities, (ii) the ability of the Commission to supervise the conduct of elections, and (iii) the results of the 2006 elections. Accordingly, we consider it our duty to state unequivocally that we are very capable of and will never fail to protect the integrity of Gecom and its Secretariat against any malevolent and despicable attempts to tarnish our image.
The 2006 General and Regional Elections were observed by groups from the Organisation of American States (OAS), the Commonwealth’s Political Affairs Division, the Carter Center, Caricom, the European Union, members of the Diplomatic Corps in Guyana and the Electoral Assistance Bureau.
All of these organisations found the 2006 General and Regional Elections to have been the most peaceful and orderly electoral process in the history of Guyana. They all found that the conditions did exist for a free expression of will by the electors and that the results of the elections reflected the collective wish of the electorate.
In a deliberate strategy to guarantee transparency, Gecom consulted with the political parties throughout the preparations for the 2006 General and Regional Elections. In addition, the entire electoral process benefited from the involvement of scrutineers from the governing party and the combined opposition political parties in Parliament.
Furthermore, the Leader of the People’s National Congress Reform and of the combined opposition political parties in Parliament accepted the declared results and conceded his party’s defeat at the 2006 elections.
The 2006 General and Regional Elections were the first in the more recent history of Guyana, which were not blemished with street protests and violence of any nature. Of course, there were elements anxiously waiting on the proverbial starting blocks to disturb the electoral process, but with astute management, proactivity and the establishment of preventative measures, we were able to contain the intentions of potential disrupters.
In view of the documented testimony of all of the observer groups that the 2006 General and Regional Elections were conducted in a free and fair manner, one can only marvel at the incredible assertions which were penned by Mr Ogunseye. Perhaps his statements derive from his disappointment that the results of the elections did not come out in favour of one or more of the contesting parties to which he has/had allegiance or to which he is/was partial, or from some other more sinister motive.
In conclusion, please be assured that Gecom will always make every effort to continue to carry out its mandate in accordance with the relevant legal provisions, in observance of international best practice, and in consultation with all key stakeholders including the political parties and civil organisations, with a view to guaranteeing transparency throughout the electoral and allied processes for the conduct of elections.
Yours faithfully,
Steve Surujbally
Chairman, Gecom
