Rosalinda Rasul yesterday testified about the use of a spreadsheet at the 2020 general elections – instead of Statements of Poll – and the incorrect numbers that were generated as a result.
Yesterday, the court reconvened to kick-start the elections trial before Acting Chief Magistrate Faith McGusty, with the prosecution presenting Rasul, an elections observer, as its first witness.
Rasul, when questioned by State Prosecutor Latchmi Rahamat, testified that she was an observer for the American Chamber of Commerce (AMCHAM) and assigned to various polling stations in regions Three and Four, where she made observations about the tabulation process. She relayed to the court that on March 2, 2020, she proceeded to the polling stations assigned to her by AMCHAM.
She stated that on March 4, 2020, while at the Ashmin’s building on High and Hadfield streets, Georgetown, she was in the Returning Officer’s room at about 10:52 am when former Deputy Chief Election Officer, Roxanne Myers, entered and told them that Returning Officer for Region Four, Clairmont Mingo, had fallen ill and indicated that the tabulation process would resume shortly. However, soon after, an ambulance arrived at the location, and she saw Mingo being escorted out of the building. During her testimony, she indicated that she observed him sitting on a bench in the building, where he was being tended to by medical professionals.
This sparked an objection by defence attorney, Eusi Anderson, who questioned Rasul’s memory of events and her medical knowledge to make such pronouncements. However, his objection was overruled. Rasul continued with her testimony, stating that agents for the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C), Kwame McCoy, and Sasenarine Singh, asked how long it would be until the tabulation process resumed, and they were told in about 45 minutes. Around 1 pm, they were informed by Myers that the tabulation process had resumed but that they would be starting with the Region Four sub-district on the East Bank of Demerara.
She stated that she observed PPP/C agents Singh and Sonia Parag objecting to Myers’ announcement since the tabulation for Georgetown was still incomplete. Myers told them that there were three boxes left to be tabulated for Georgetown, to which Parag objected, stating that it was more than three boxes.
She then stated that around 2 pm, the official tabulation process resumed, with Elections Officer Michelle Miller and Alexander Boban proceeding to commence the tabulation. However, party agents continued to object since Miller was using a spreadsheet instead of the standard SOPs to call numbers that were then inputted into the computer.
“Various party agents from the PPP and ANUG asked if it was a spreadsheet being used and not the standard SOPs.” Another objection was then raised by Anderson, who stated that Rasul was stating third-party information. He requested that the magistrate explain to the media and persons present that the views expressed were not that of the court.
State Prosecutor Darshan Ramdhani KC responded, asking that they keep the proceedings professional and not supersede the procedure. After the exchange, the magistrate stated that she does not have to indicate anything to the public or stop the witness. The prosecution then resumed, with Rahamat continuing her questioning of Rasul.
Rasul continued her testimony, stating that during the time the objections were being made, Miller stopped reading what was on the paper. That was when former Chief Election Officer Keith Lowenfield entered and observed that the PPP agents had made objections. She stated that PPP agent Parag asked why a spreadsheet was being used instead of the SOPs, and Lowenfield responded that he saw no issues with the paper being used, as it was meant to expedite the process.
“Around 2:35 pm, Miller proceeded to call numbers from the spreadsheet, and various party agents had their SOPs and were following.” Magistrate McGusty then asked how Rasul how she knew what the SOPs looked like, to which she responded that she had seen them before and could identify them by their length and columns.
She also indicated that Singh had loudly stated that he was following what was being said by Miller. Rahamat then asked Rasul what she observed from the APNU+AFC agents. She responded, “I observed that they remained quiet, and it was the PPP agents making the objections.”
She further testified that during the tabulation process, she observed that the numbers Miller called raised objections from Parag and Singh, as the numbers did not match what their SOPs contained.
The witness then stated that when the room became crowded and more PPP/C agents entered, along with Lowenfield, he indicated that they had agreed to use the spreadsheet, and if any objections were raised, they would resort to using the SOPs.
“It was then that Ms. Sonia Parag asked Mr. Lowenfield to check the SOPs and the numbers that were called. Mr. Lowenfield did a random sampling of three boxes.” She admitted, however, that she did not know the source of the spreadsheet.
She added that after the random sampling was done, Singh told Lowenfield that there were 21 boxes in total and that 17 of those boxes had incorrect figures. He stated that the SOPs were not being used and then requested an SOPs-versus-SOPs comparison. At that point, then-Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo asked that the data entry on the computer be projected onto a larger screen for safety reasons.
Enrique Livan and the computer data entry issue
According to Rasul, around 1:17 am on March 5, 2020, Enrique Livan had taken over the process from Miller and the other person, but he had made a lot of mistakes while reading the numbers. She added that around 1:35 am, Livan stated that he was not cut out for the process and left.
This led to a heated discussion and exchange of words between party agents about the process. Livan later returned, took the data entry computer and the flash drive, and left.
Rasul testified that the computer was the one being used by Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) for data entry and was being projected on the screen. She stated that around 3 am that day, she exited the Returning Officer’s room after hearing a commotion outside. She said she overheard persons yelling about Livan tampering with the data.
She then stated that Livan was made to project the information on the laptop onto the PowerPoint screen. She added that Lowenfield was also in the room where the commotion occurred. When Livan projected the information on screen, Sasenarine Singh and Aneesa Mohamed, two PPP/C agents, exclaimed, “No, not that one.”
She testified that party agents then asked Livan to scroll, and it was noticed that the various totals were incorrect and that Livan kept making mistakes. She further testified that Lowenfield indicated to members that the IT department of GECOM would fix the issues and that tabulation would resume at 9 am that day.
Rasul told the court that at 9 am, she returned to the Ashmin’s building, where various persons from different observer missions and members of the diplomatic corps were present, along with party agents.
She added that screenshots of the previous tabulations were shown to her, and they were the same as those being projected on screen. However, the tabulation process for the day had not begun. She related that there was a bomb threat around 10:30 am; however, she did not believe it was a genuine threat.
She added that around 12 pm, Myers entered the Returning Officer’s room and announced that the tabulation process would start shortly. Tabulation commenced at about 1:30 pm, and shortly after, Mingo, in front of all observers and party agents, made an announcement that he would be making a declaration. This resulted in protests erupting in the building, with various party agents stating that tabulation had not been completed.
Anderson, however, objected to this testimony, stating that the witness seemed to be making up things as she went along. He added that these disclosures were not made to the defence team by the state.
Ramdhani, in response, stated that the defence lawyer should be able to get all disclosures and that it was their responsibility to check through and discuss them with their client.
“The defence attorney needs to read his bundle,” Ramdhani said.
Magistrate McGusty then ruled that the deposition would be allowed and that the witness could flesh out their testimony. She noted that at the appropriate time, the defence will be able to cross-examine.
The charges stem from alleged irregularities during the 2020 elections, drawing significant public attention and involving former Chief Election Officer, Keith Lowenfield; former Deputy Chief Election Officer, Roxanne Myers; Region Four Returning Officer, Clairmont Mingo; Opposition Member of Parliament, Volda Lawrence, People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) member, Carol Smith-Joseph; and Elections Officers, Sheffern February, Enrique Livan, Denise Bobb-Cummings, and Michelle Miller.
