PNCR Region 10 member Sharma Solomon today defended his group’s concerns over the process for accreditation of delegates and other shortcomings at the party’s turbulent elections two Sundays ago.
In a detailed statement, Solomon said “If the processes as per the Party Rules were not adhered to these bring into question transparency, credibility and fairness. It also brings into question if the will and wishes of the people were truly made known. It is accepted no system is fool proof and mistakes will be made. What would not be accepted by Region 10 is the refusal to fix mistakes and try to improve on practices/systems. What will not be accepted is denial that the management of the electoral processes was acceptable and led to a free, transparent and successful congress and this event was only marred by the “disorderly” conduct of some.”
The full statement follows:
For any evaluation of the PNCR electoral processes to be deemed credible it has to be guided by the Party Rules and corresponding action or inaction by those involved in efforts to learn where we went wrong and what can be done to avoid a repeat. The PNCR is a national organisation, vying for the seat of government and “there is no better way of leading than by example,” borrowing from the phrase of the Party Founder Leader Mr. Forbes Burnham.
Membership/Delegates
I am aware of a Linden membership of eight hundred and five (805) Consistent with this membership new application and renewal forms were duly completed, submitted and fees attached. These forms were submitted by MP Vanessa Kissoon and Sharma Solomon over a period of time and the receipts are available for verification/perusal. Party Rule 8 (4) ‘Proof of Party Membership’ requires that “Possession of a valid and current Membership Card shall be prima facie proof of membership of the party.” To become a member of a group and delegate to congress an individual is required to prove his/her bona fide by having in possession a prescribed membership card. It is the responsibility of Congress Place to issue this card.
As per party’s policy eligibility as a delegate is determined by financial standing for at least two years within the congress’ period. In 2014 this would mean being a member for 2012/2013 and 2013/2014. A member’s history is not kept at the group level but is stored at Congress Place and verification of this by the groups would have to be done with the support of the secretariat.
By letter sent on the 24th to the secretariat, in the capacity as Central Executive Member and member of the Accreditation Committee, I urged the issuance of cards for members and volunteered my time to be part of the process in bringing this to fruition. There was no acknowledgement of the letter or acceptance of offer. Efforts overtime to have membership verified from Congress Place, with a format presented to the General Secretary, were met with some success. In some instances delegates were named by the secretariat via correspondence sent to me when it is the responsibility of the groups to decide on their representatives.
The secretariat unilateral reconfiguration of groups
On 19th March Linden representatives (Sharma Solomon and Region 10 MP Vanessa Kissoon) were summoned to Congress Place for a meeting. Present at this meeting were Mr. David Granger (Leader), Basil Williams (Chairman), Oscar Clarke (General Secretary) and Renis Morian (Region 10 MP). The region’s representatives were instructed to configure all Linden party groups based on the national electoral boundary lines. Linden complied with the directive.
At a meeting at Congress Place on 29th May for all regional groups, of which Region 10 was in attendance, it was learnt that the configuration of groups based on boundary lines was a requirement the secretariat made only of Linden. Subsequently and without consultation with leaders of the Linden groups and the regional leadership, the secretariat apparently aided by others dismantled the original groups (i.e) the groups formed on boundary lines. This reconfiguration resulted in members being moved into groups that were not in existence before and without their knowledge or approval. Before these groups were allowed to be recognised by the secretariat, minutes had to be submitted, or we were told they will not be recognised.
Reconfiguration also posed problems in determining delegates. Linden and the secretariat had conflicting positions on the numbers and identification of delegates, since Linden was guided by their original groups and Congress Place insisted on using their reconfigured groups. For instance when Linden said X amount of persons were entitled to be delegates in Y group based on membership roll, the secretariat would say only A amount are entitled to be in this group because it has only B amount of members. And where C was named as an entitled delegate in Z group, the secretariat said Z group already has its entitled delegates’ quota. This matter was never entirely resolved even though assurance was given it would be.
The confusion of moving members around into different groups made it difficult to trace and allot delegates, an exercise Linden was working to sort out up to the evening of 26th July, with a commitment given by the secretariat that the issues will be resolved for voting day, 27th July. The Party Rules are very clear on how groups should be formed, outlined in Rule 10 (1) (a) and (b). And though para 2 of Rule 10 (1) (b) allows the General Secretary in “special circumstances” to form groups with “smaller numbers and [he] shall report to the Central Executive Committee when any such authorisation is given” this was not applied in the instance of Linden. Neither did members request they be transferred to other groups as per Rule 10 (e) (i).
Verifying members/delegates
Ensuring each member was issued a membership card was consistent with Rule 8 (4) for proof, Rule 15 for identifying delegates and was intended to avoid non-members or ineligible members casting a ballot which would have been illegal. A party membership card informs when the person became a member. The secretariat’s decision to approve the use of national identification card or passport as a mean of identification opened the electoral process for manipulation because these documents do not have the needed information to prove membership and eligibility as delegates. These are the reason for demanding that the membership card be issued to every member. Members, including yours truly, who turned up on 27th July at Congress Place hoped they would have received their cards by this date. This non-issuance of cards affected a significant portion of Linden’s members and delegates.
Nomination and Allotment of delegates
I was nominated for the positions of Leader, Chairman, Vice Chairman (VC) and Committee Member. The letter sent to me, signed by the General Secretary excluded the nomination for VC. The secretariat was advised of the oversight, with the accompanied evidence attached. This oversight was never corrected because the nomination was not reflected on the ballot.
Consistent with the party structure of allocation for delegates Linden was entitled to 120 delegates. The party determined 119 but for the peace of the process it was accepted. The secretariat said total delegates were 794, which shows that 15 percent of the delegates were from Linden. While Linden has a different figure of the amount of delegates that were denied the right to vote, the secretariat placed the number at 55 which reflects 46 percent of Linden’s delegates and this is unacceptable, given the efforts made by Linden to ensure their right to express their will and wishes of their leader(s) of choice.
If the situation is examined for other regions the numbers become larger which not only brings into focus the disregard for the party rules but also the management of this process. Linden’s situation is prominent because Linden has been the most vocal.
Accreditation Committee
The Accreditation Committee has among its responsibilities to ensure the business of the congress is run consistent with the Rules and everyone accredited as a delegate is a bona fide member of the party over a stipulated period. Contrary to claims made by Volda Lawrence (VC) the committee, of which I was a member never teleconferenced, shared emails or met on accreditation activities until 26th July when congress was in its second day. Delegates seating had to have been decided, determined and confirmed by this committee before congress which started on 25th July. Proper completion of these processes would have determined the apportioning of delegates, the issuing of the respective cards and ironing out any kinks in the system.
The Voting list given to Linden the evening of 26th July was not same list given to us on 27th July and I was involved in no meeting when this change was made or had the opportunity to verify the changes.
Returning Officer
A returning officer can only pronounce based on the assigned activity. The Returning Officer was given a list by the party and his responsibility was to ensure those that appeared on the list cast their ballots and their votes were counted. The Returning Officer had nothing to do with the preparation of the list and processes that preceded the formulation of that list.
Analysis of the event
If the processes as per the Party Rules were not adhered to these bring into question transparency, credibility and fairness. It also brings into question if the will and wishes of the people were truly made known. It is accepted no system is fool proof and mistakes will be made. What would not be accepted by Region 10 is the refusal to fix mistakes and try to improve on practices/systems. What will not be accepted is denial that the management of the electoral processes was acceptable and led to a free, transparent and successful congress and this event was only marred by the “disorderly” conduct of some.
Members of the PNCR can do better and must be called on to do so. There needs to be honest evaluation and systems put in place to avoid recurrences. Consideration should be given to the various issues raised which would make the PNCR stronger and avoid similar criticisms in future. As a national party we owe it to ourselves, the members, supporters and citizens of Guyana.
The criticism of Linden being well organised, financed and unformed needs to be noted. It is Linden’s view that some believe disorganisation must be the new standard bearer for the party. Region 10 unlike other regions did not receive any assistance from Congress Place to attend the congress and our ability to attend all three days, take care of our transportation and meals would obviously attract attention and criticism. Lindeners pooled their resources and shared with fellow comrades from Kwakwani who were provided with appropriate conditions after Congress Place let them down. Every person in the three (3) 35-seater buses and one (1) 15-seater minibus, except a few whose small children accompanied them, were members of the party according to our membership roll.
Linden is aware of former leaders, notably the Founder Leader was a stickler for effective organisation and standards of excellence. For the town which is named in his honour, party members sought to do no less. Mediocrity will not be allowed to flourish and every aspect of this party’s business will be conducted in the proper manner, even if it means Linden has to lead the way.
