Opposition APNU and AFC yesterday called on President Donald Ramotar to either substantiate or retract accusations that they manipulated the results of last year’s elections, while warning that his statements threaten political and ethnic unity.
In the wake of his statements, which included the claim that the Guyana Elections Commission (Gecom) was “penetrated,” Stabroek News was told that Ramotar has indicated to Chairman of the elections body Dr Steve Surujbally that he meant that “Gecom did nothing wrong” but that the elections day staff was biased.
Opposition leader David Granger yesterday said that Ramotar’s new claims would affect the ongoing tripartite engagements between the PPP/C administration and APNU and AFC.
“When the president of this country starts to call the opposition charlatans and to announce publicly that he thinks we are behaving in bad faith, when he accuses us of manipulating the elections and when he accuses us of racism, this is not the type of language that can build trust and I think that it will have an impact on the tripartite talks,” Granger, who is also APNU Chairman, told a press briefing, while also noting that Ramotar had no proof to substantiate his claims.
Calling Ramotar’s statements unmeritorious and inferring criminal behaviour, Granger said, “These are serious matters. Racism is a crime. Manipulating elections is a crime. He’s accusing us of criminal behaviour and he’s wrong, it’s not a matter of just choosing bad words, he has no proof of that.”
He informed that APNU would seek an explanation from Ramotar and that sometime during the course of yesterday he would dispatch a letter to the President detailing the coalition’s concern about his reported statements.
Not long after, AFC executive Moses Nagamootoo urged Ramotar to “put up or shut up,” saying that he should supply the proof or retract his comments. “Unless these remarks are withdrawn it will not only damage the political fabric of this nation it will also damage the ethnic fabric maybe unalterably,” Nagamootoo emphasized at an AFC news conference.
Fear
In the interview, published in the Guyana Chronicle’s Sunday edition, Ramotar was quoted as saying that the PPP/C was cheated of a majority through the manipulation of the elections results. “I think we lost some votes, no doubt, but I don’t think we lost enough to bring us under 50%, but the results were through manipulation,” he said. “My own realistic assessment was that we had probably between 52 [and] 53%,” he said, while also indicating that his party withdrew requests for partial recounts to avert any outbreak of violence.
The Ramotar interview was published two days after the opening of the 10th Parliament, which will today scrutinise a government request for approval of billions in supplementary budget allocations from the Contingencies Fund.
AFC, which is accusing the president of telling “blatant lies” yesterday, said the suggestions of vote-rigging by the opposition can be seen as a sign of fear of the opposition-controlled National Assembly, which will scrutinise the $5.7 billion supplementary allocation.
“They clearly fear the effectiveness of this new political dispensation and see themselves being forced to answer to the people and conform [to] the Constitution of Guyana,” the party said in a statement read at its news conference yesterday.
APNU yesterday also expressed concern that on the of the eve of tabling of two “critical” financial bills, it had yet to meet with Finance Minister Dr. Ashni Singh and it said the lack of financial discussions are negatively influencing the tripartite talks. “Several important aspects of the tripartite talks are not moving, particularly the formulation of the national budget; up to February 15 (yesterday), we have not been able to have a meeting between Dr. Ashni Singh and the team from APNU and AFC to plan the national budget, so a lot of things are still unsettled,” Granger said.
‘Anti-PPP’
Surujbally, in a brief comment, told Stabroek News that following the interview he saw Ramotar, who tried to assuage his concerns by indicating that he meant that Gecom “did nothing wrong” but that the elections day staff “was anti-PPP.”
Ramotar, in the interview, suggested that the opposition scared away PPP/C polling agents in some cases and compromised the vote counting. “…They did a lot of wicked things in South Georgetown and some other areas, where they created an atmosphere not to have any PPP/C polling agents around, and they managed to get them out by terrible hostility and threatening violence and so on. I think, also, that you’re right again and that they penetrated Gecom and controlled (to some extent) the elections machinery… and they were doing a lot of manipulation at that point in time. Even with the counting, I understand that they kept people far away so that they could not see what was happening. That was confirmed to me by independent observers,” he was quoted as saying.
Although Surujbally acknowledged that there were some singular occurrences on polling day where staff departed from instructions, he maintained that on the whole the staff was “well-trained,” and this conclusion was supported by elections observers.
The methodology used to hire the 2011 elections staff was the same that was used during the previous elections. “I don’t hire Indo-Guyanese, or Afro-Guyanese, I hire Guyanese,” Surujbally pointed out, later adding, “I stand by my staff.”
He added, however, that in light of criticisms, Gecom would seek to ensure that all parties are satisfied with the performance of its staff at any future elections, whether local government or general elections.
Gecom Commissioner Vincent Alexander, meanwhile, noted that there are no legal implications as a result of Ramotar’s statements, since the results were declared and accepted. However, he questioned the basis for Ramotar’s accusations and its implications for Gecom. “What are you saying for Gecom when you make statements like that?” he questioned.
Alexander, however, felt that any imputation about the conduct of elections day staff is also a criticism of Gecom. “Elections day staff is Gecom, they are not separable, Gecom recruited the staff… and you can’t differentiate [it] from Gecom,” he noted.
He dubbed the president’s recent statements “a sudden flip-flop,” reminding that while the opposition parties had raised concerns about Gecom, it was the PPP/C that defended it. He also pointed out that while the PPP/C did ask for a recount before the declaration of results, the party representatives walked out on one of them and the party withdrew the others. “There was no question then, bearing in mind all the parties had access to the system by virtue of the scrutineers at the place of polls,” he noted, while questioning the motive behind criticising the elections results months after the fact.
Following the delayed announcement of the results, Surujbally had stressed that the results had to undergo the necessary scrutiny to produce reliable declarations. “…We must at all times strive to get it right,” he said, “That is why the results having been derived from the elections, which were conducted in accordance with international best practice, must be absolutely accurate, must be unchallengeable and must be able to withstand any scrutiny.”
He had also dismissed any suggestion that Gecom was working with any of the parties. “Gecom is not and will never be involved… in any clandestine machinations with any political party nor do we rig elections,” he had said.
Neither of the two international observer missions that scrutinized the November 28 general elections has reported misconduct on the scale that Ramotar referred to.
