Dear Editor,
Notwithstanding Vincent Alexander’s assertion a few weeks ago that; “People should not acquiescence to any election that is not conducted after these things are implemented,” he persists with what appears to be an obsession with certain electoral matters that bother him so much so that they appear to weigh heavily on his thinking. Meanwhile, observers are trying to figure out what is it that Alexander and company are up to; are they trying to embarrass GECOM’S chairman publicly and to pressure her to kowtow to their demands – whatever those demands might be?
Since the chairman is not known for arbitrariness, making rash, unilateral or any decision for that matter without sharing her views on the issue at hand with all six commissioners and requesting a feed-back from them, indications are that her shield to fend off the critics and pessimists will be to ensure that in the absence of consensus, majority rule and democratic governance prevails at GECOM. Are they trying to shrug off references to their electoral rap sheet for facilitating rigged elections and to ride out any such references till November 2025? What is desired by the APNU+AFC is well-nigh impossible since, what is done is done. While it may be patched over, the stain cannot be changed nor washed away. A deep sense of mistrust of the PNC’s model of governance continues to haunt the nation; are they trying to project themselves as the victim rather than the perpetrator of rigged election having been charged for attempted larceny of elections results?
The PNC is no ethical protector nor defender of the sanctity of the ballot box. To be an ethical protector, the PNC must begin with itself by stripping away its electoral ignominies of the past. As for its future, it must abandon the sneaky attempt to use voter impersonation as the raison d’etre for the introduction of digital fingerprint capture as the basis for a completely new house-to-house registration exercise to produce a fresh national register of registrants from which will emerge a voters list. When persons whose names appear on that list turn up to vote on E-day, they will be subject to biometric fingerprint identification at polling stations. However, this new approach will require passage of legislation. If this lengthy process goes through, three things can happen; first, the PNC would have achieved its main objective as regards biometrics; second, many can be disenfranchised and third, elections ‘2025 could be postponed beyond the constitutionally due year.
Do the PNC genuinely want GECOM to fulfill its constitutional mandate in time for elections 2025? First of all, based on public statements and letters, it is obvious that Commissioner Alexander is neither comfortable with nor appreciative of the three plus four company to which he has been assigned. While serving in that capacity, and through media channels, a sustained campaign is being waged to instill fear and distrust amongst the electorate about GECOM’s creditworthiness. No effort is spared to brow beat GECOM into submission, to prove its CEO and DCEO incompetent and to exercise dominance over the proceedings of and matters under consideration at the body. Are APNU+AFC mouthpieces spouting euphemistic language about democracy and expressing laissez-faire optimism about winning the next election because they have convinced themselves that they have a chance of doing so?
Clearly, this is an elusive dream. Winning a free and fair election in Guy-ana, requires more than empty talk, delusional optimism and wishful thinking. It is more about hard work, winning and maintaining the confidence and broad support of all classes and social strata in Guyanese society; the party that wins an election would have done so because of its record for delivery of goods and services and uplifting the well-being of the people while in government. Presently, none of the opposition parties have what wining a free and fair elections calls for… credibility! Could it be, that the PNC may be calculating that should they not win, at the minimum, they must not return to parliament with a significantly reduced number of seats? This is a strong possibility since the APNU+AFC’s performance in government was dismal; their insensitive behaviour and modus operandi in favour of ‘the good life’ for an elitist cabal, left thousands of coalition supporters frustrated and alienated and to fend for themselves in an economy characterized by self-aggrandizement, plantain chips, and metal arches;
Could the electoral strategy of the PNC be aimed at ensuring that the PPP/C returns to parliament as a minority government? Here, a small dose of Marxism that might prove useful if not is applicable; ‘History repeats itself first (in 1964) as a tragedy and the second time (in 2015) as a farce.’ Shades of the PNC and APNU+AFC who had ‘draped themselves in the political, rhetorical and ideological trappings of previous generations, but has since assumed a farcical form (as APNU) when originally (as PNC) they had ‘failed tragically.’ Hopefully this Q&A session would have been helpful to the three-card election schemers at Congress Place who fail to recognize the crucial difference between the informed and uninformed, a reasoned and unreasoned, a responsible and irresponsible decision-makers and those who chose to hide behind a web of deception and recourse to a patently misplaced passion for a menu of measures at GECOM labelled reforms at the expense of reason.
Sincerely,
Clement J. Rohee
