Some Presiding Officers (POs) from the East Coast of Demerara polling stations, which have now become the focal point of the APNU+AFC’s allegations of electoral fraud due to missing documents, say they acted on instructions from their Deputy Returning Officers (DROs) to not place them in the ballot boxes.
When Stabroek News contacted four of the POs, some were reluctant to comment on the issue, while the others refused to as they said they are fearful since some of their colleagues have received threats.
The coalition has objected to the inclusion of results from 29 boxes from stations from Vryheid’s Lust to Chateau Margot, on the East Coast, while saying that several “statutorily required documents” were missing from them. These account for over 5,000 votes, with the majority of them being cast in favour of the PPP/C.
It had been found that several of the boxes contain only ballots cast. Missing are the Official List of Electors for each polling station, the folio of registered electors, counterfoils for used and unused ballots, and used ballot box seals.
PO Bhagwandai Sukhnandan, who was assigned to the polling station at Chateau Margot Primary School, told Stabroek News yesterday that she was instructed by the DRO to not include any documents in ballot box 4638. “…We were instructed that we should not include no other documents in the ballot box except the valid votes and used and unused tender ballots. The other documents that were supposed to go in the ballot box, we were told not to do that,” she said.
The statutory documents missing from that box were spoiled ballots, the marked list of electors and destroyed ballot papers.
Sukhnandan noted that the DRO said that he was working with the instruction he received. The DRO, she said, did not state specifically from who or where he got the instruction.
“He wouldn’t tell us all of that. He said it came from GECOM but we can’t question him from who in particular because remember we were counting at the time you know and packing boxes and so as we count. He just rush in to all the different polling stations and deliver the message,” Sukhnandan said.
She explained that while she is aware of the procedure which has to be followed, she was not in a position to question the instructions given to her. “We know the normal procedure yes but the information that came to us is a last minute change from GECOM and we had to work with instructions because remember we are working and we need our pay and all of that. We had to follow instructions. We are working with GECOM,” Sukhnandan added.
Sukhnandan said she is concerned about the issue now being the centre of a controversy. “Remember we cannot deny the voters. That is their democratic right and we can’t disenfranchise them. So whether if it’s GECOM fault, you can’t disenfranchise the voters for that,“ Sukhnandan noted.
Meanwhile, another PO, who was based at the polling station situated at the People’s Assembly of God Church and who wished not to be named, also related that she was informed before the close of polls not to include any of the statutory documents in ballot box 4580.
Only the ballots and the remaining ballot papers were placed in the box, she said.
Missing from this box were counterfoils and a marked list of electors.
The PO stated that DRO, Komal Singh, related to her and others that the instructions came from Returning Officer Clairmont Mingo through his clerk. “The DRO said to us that this information, the instruction, just came from the RO through the clerk and they have passed it on to us and this is what we are supposed to do,” she said.
The PO said she worked in the same position for past elections and based on her experience she was aware that the instructions given were not the right procedure. “Before I close the box and seal it, I keep on calling the DRO and telling them this is not what we were supposed to do. They said that is the order and that is what we have to do,” she noted.
Unfair
The PO further explained that she is “very much” concerned about the issue while stating that she believes that it is unfair for POs like her being blamed when whomever passed the instructions should be the ones held responsible.
“I am very much concerned because it bother me that this is what happen and they blame us instead of blaming the person who pass down the instructions. We are supposed to work with instructions and that’s what we did… remember if you are given an order, that is what you have to work with… so I am little bothered about…..all the members from our group and even the agents that were there, everything was done in free and fairness so there is no way that had we any difficulty on that day,” she related.
There have been conflicting reports about why the boxes did not have the documents with at least two GECOM workers publicly claiming that they were instructed to not include the documents. DRO Paul Jaisingh admitted that he gave the instructions to include only ballots; unused, valid and rejected ones.
He wrote to GECOM explaining that he issued the instruction because he had been instructed by the secretary of his superior and District Four Returning Officer Mingo that some documents be omitted and placed in a bag and given to GECOM.
“Dear Madam Chair, Please be informed that instructions were given by Miss. Carlyn Duncan (Clerk to the Returning Officer Mr.Clairmont Mingo-District # 4) to include only unused, valid and rejected ballots in the ballot boxes. This was communicated to the respective Presiding Officers (POs) who complied. As a result the other documents were placed in the bag provided. This instruction was given on Election Day a few hours before the close of the poll. Other Deputy Returning Officers affected by this decision can confirm the same,” Jaisingh said.
GECOM refuted Jaisingh’s assertions saying that it had received signed correspondence from a “number of DROs” that they did not give any such instructions.
Another PO, who goes by the name Wendy Ann on Facebook, went public in her posts saying she was angry after learning that GECOM purportedly received a letter from DROs denying that such an instruction had been passed.
“Now it may seem as though I as a Presiding Officer lied when I said we were instructed by our DRO to not put the documents in the box… But I’ll ask one (1), just one (1) question – “If ALL the POs under a particular DRO omitted documents, is that a mere coincidence?” You’d expect the most two (2) POs to make the same mistake, but ALL??? These boxes were sealed in the presence of these DROs, yet, nobody can give account for the missing documents?? And now, the DROs released this joint statement saying they never instructed the POs to omit those documents?? I’ll leave that one for the smart people to figure out. Let’s hope they publish the names of these DROs and the joint statement they made,” she wrote.
In a statement on Saturday, GECOM Public Relations Officer Yolanda Ward stated that the DROs said in their statement that they were advised to “make regular checks to all stations ensuring that there was a smooth flow” and “to remind POs to ensure all statutory documents were in the ballot boxes.”
However, when asked to produce the signed document, Ward had said she that would “seek permission” to make this information available. However, to date, she hasn’t.
On Sunday, following a meeting by the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), a decision was taken for the votes from the 29 boxes to be included and tabulated. “The Commission has decided to include the SoRs [Statements of Recount] for the ballot boxes with missing documents in the tabulation exercise. It was noted that the Commission does not intend to disenfranchise any elector. However, the Commission will continue to investigate the matter,” Ward told the press via a WhatsApp message.
