While making a case for her party to investigate the conduct of its Georgetown District election, People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) member Annette Ferguson also called on it to “rise to the occasion of practising fairness, honesty” and “being democratic when it comes to its internal business or affairs”.
Ferguson’s call came after she lost the bid for the chairmanship of the Georgetown District – the party’s largest support base – at its October 2 conference. She has since written to the party’s Central Executive Committee (CEC) protesting the conduct of the elections and calling for an investigation.
The position of Chair of the Georgetown District was held by senior PNCR member Volda Lawrence for a number of years. Lawrence was also the Chair of the PNCR and served as a government minister when the APNU+AFC coalition was in power.
It is unclear why Lawrence did not contest the post once again but she was responsible for the hosting of the elections, according to Ferguson’s letter.
In her letter, dated October 3 and seen by this newspaper, Ferguson raised a number of issues with the conduct of the elections and said that they warrant immediate investigation. Her call comes at a time when the government has been continually accusing the PNCR-led APNU+AFC of attempting to rig the March 2020 general and regional elections.
Outlining her case, Ferguson said that there were irregularities in the conduct of the elections which cannot be swept under the rug. She said that a letter advising of the conference was issued on August 15 and informed that a returning officer would be identified and an accreditation committee set up. That letter did not provide any additional information prompting Ferguson to write to then Vice Chair of the Georgetown District Hazel Pinder, on September 18, raising a number of concerns.
Pinder, to date, has not responded to Ferguson’s letter.
On September 29, Lawrence, in her role as outgoing Chair, called a meeting with group leaders in the Georgetown District where she informed them that on election day registration would be done from 8 am to 11 am; a meeting would be convened with the returning officer and candidates, and a screen would be set up to display the ballots to ensure transparency. Ferguson informed the CEC that the name of the returning officer was not provided at that meeting.
The following day, Ferguson said she received a WhatsApp message from Aubrey Reteymer requesting an email address for her. Reteymer reportedly sent her a “ten points” guideline for the conduct of the election.
…a day of irregularities
According to Ferguson’s missive to the CEC, the day of the elections was filled with irregularities. She informed that registration went beyond the agreed time and ended around midday with no explanation for the extension. Additionally, the agreed meeting with the returning officer was not facilitated for candidates.
Voting commenced just around 1:35 pm according to Ferguson and it was only then that Reteymer was introduced as the returning officer for the elections.
“Cde Retheymer failed to announce or declare (the) number of delegates registered to vote. Also, Cde Retheymer failed to inform delegates [of] number of ballots to be cast and what method the voting process will take. At the commencement of voting, Cde Retheymer announced the number of delegates for the following groups: Alberttown and Albouystown but failed to continue. Cde Retheymer went against his own ten points guidelines,” Ferguson complained.
She said that Reteymer had informed the candidates that only delegates who have registered will be allowed to vote but on election day, there were a number of persons who were not registered but allowed to vote. Additionally, some persons were not allowed to vote.
“…a typical example, Cde Roysdale Forde, SC, MP, an automatic delegate, registered and provided armband was disenfranchised. When I enquired from the Returning Officer, reason for Cde Forde being denied his right to a ballot to cast his vote of his choice, I was told that, this was a decision by the Committee,” she said in the letter.
Additionally, Ferguson said that it was agreed that delegates should ensure that the armband or sticker issued must be worn throughout the election exercise but that was also not adhered to. She alleged that persons voting for the Chairperson’s position removed armbands from their wrist and gave it to others who were not registered.
Ferguson said that there was one instance where someone was allowed to vote without an armband as the ballots were being prepared to be emptied.
When it came to the announcement of results, Ferguson said that Reteymer informed party member Clayton Newman that 214 persons were registered to vote and 211 ballots were cast. She maintained that the information was never officially relayed to her as a candidate for leadership.
However, at the end of the count, the results showed that Troy Garraway secured 121 votes while Ferguson got 87. There were 5 spoilt ballots which amounted to 213.
“On discovering what was announced, both myself and Comrade Newman approached the Returning Officer for clarification and verification amongst the numbers. There was an exchange between Comrade Newman, Comrade Lawrence, et al on the issue. Comrade Lawrence advised that as the candidate I should speak to the Returning Officer. This was done and I was advised by him that verification can be done the following day, Monday, October 3, 2022,” the letter informed.
Investigation
As a result of the conduct of the elections, Ferguson is asking the CEC to investigate Pinder’s refusal to acknowledge the letter written to her and why the candidates were not made aware of who comprised the Accreditation Committee.
Additionally, she wants to know why the name of the returning officer was not announced prior to polling day and the reason behind the refusal to furnish the candidates with the list of delegates voting at the elections.
“Why ballots were not counted and verified in the presence of candidates, prior to the elections process? Why the failure to establish a transparent mechanism at the balloting tables? That is, it was clear to the eyes that the balloting clerks were ONLY issuing ballots, without verifying that persons were indeed registered as delegates. Glaring absence of checks and balances. Why were persons allowed to register after the close of registration, while the final delegates list was being prepared by the Returning Officer?
“Why were persons allowed to vote without armbands on their wrist and in some cases, armband held in fist? Why was Comrade Roysdale Forde, SC, MP disenfranchised when he satisfied both guidelines (3) and (4); set out by the Returning Officer? Which committee as reported by the Returning Officer, denied Cde. Roysdale Forde, SC, MP his right to vote after satisfying guidelines (3) and (4), set out by the Returning Officer? Kindly provide name of persons who comprised this committee,” Ferguson demanded.
Looking at it
A senior source in the PNCR said that the letter has been received by the CEC and they are looking at it. The source said that the matter remains internal to the party and will be addressed to the satisfaction of all involved.
“What I can tell you at this time is that we are looking at this. They are some serious allegations but the matter is a PNCR one and PNCR, like the democratic party it is, will be addressing it. We are confident that the process was in accordance with our principles and that is all I can say at this time,” Stabroek News’ source related.
