Dear Editor,
The recent statement on the recount process by the Organisation of American States (OAS) that, “A declaration based on these results would lead to the installation of a legitimate government” is that organization’s opinion. However, it is another clear demonstration that the OAS is not an impartial observer of the Guyana election process but is instead an instrument for regime change as was seen in Bolivia. It is Guyanese and their institutions’ opinion which matters not that of foreign interests.
While foreign observers have the right to express their opinion on the election they are observing it is expected that it is done in a responsible and non-partisan manner. The OAS’s declaration that the process is credible to decide a winner in the elections was made even before the process is completed. And before the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) determines how it would deal with numerous cases and evidence of irregularities and anomalies which have been revealed from the examination of the ballot boxes. This is no small matter in the context of Guyana’s electoral history and is critical for the acceptance of the results of the recount.
In the current situation where the country’s unity and cohesion are threatened, the OAS is recklessly invoking the “unhelpful” position that no election is perfect therefore the results should be accepted. No foreign interest, political or otherwise, can decide what level of imperfections Guyanese are willing to embrace as acceptable in our elections. This is the solid right of Guyanese and their institutions. It is we who have to live with the decisions and their consequences, it is therefore our right to set election standards that are higher than the so-called “international norm”. This can be a profound contribution to our political culture and governance. In so performing Guyana can contribute to global enhancement of elections practice and accountability. As an independent nation, we have the right aspiring to higher electoral standards than that of many Western countries including the United States of America.
The children of enslavement, indenture along with our indigenous people, all victims of European exploitation and oppression, must rise to the historical challenges posed by our National and Regional Elections. We have the opportunity to demonstrate to the world that we have a sense of justice and nationhood that is bigger than “winners and losers” when that outcome is based on questionable and tainted elections. I am on record as early as the 1997 elections in contending that our elections are a racial/ethnic census, and that elections have the potential of aggravating political and economic competition to the point of destroying the nation. In this context, Guyana does not have the luxury to continue playing with fraudulent elections as we have been doing for a considerable time. I have made the point that periodic elections in Guyana, if they are not to be counterproductive, as have been for most of our election history, have to be based on the highest standards. This is something the OAS is not interested in as witnessed by their track record.
I end by reiterating that the decision of whether the March 2, 2020 elections and the recount process is credible enough to form the basis for a “legitimate government” is a matter for the Guyanese people and their institutions – and not foreign interests like the OAS.
Yours faithfully,
Tacuma Ogunseye
