The Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) acknowledges the concerns raised in the letter titled ‘Contradictory information from GECOM’ (SN, November 17) and the letter from Latchman Sookdeo (SN; GC, November 18).
The letter in the Stabroek News of November 17 refers specifically to problems the letter writer supposedly encountered with the GECOM temporary staff at the ID card distribution centre located at the West Ruimveldt Primary School, during his/her attempts to collect his/her ID card without the ‘pink slip.’ Upon reading this letter, we launched an investigation to determine the veracity of the publicly raised concerns with the objective of taking remedial action if necessary.
Regrettably, we are unaware of the particulars of the author of the letter and we therefore could not contact him/her directly.
The investigation has revealed that such a case involved a Ms Iana Seals [sic], who visited the distribution centre in question on 15.11.2009, to uplift her ID card. She did not possess the ‘pink slip’ which would have alacratised the process leading to the delivery of her ID card. The photograph on the ID card in the name of Iana Seals [sic] did not match the facial features of the person who presented herself in this name. Therefore, the ID distribution staff, with consensus from both scrutineers assigned to the centre, did not hand over the card. This, according to a documented statement which is signed by all of the ID card distribution staff and the two scrutineers, caused Ms Seals [sic] to react unceremoniously. This reaction, again according to the statement, included a threat from Ms Seals [sic] to, in her capacity of a journalist, publicize this matter via the media.
We are not making a definitive correlation that Ms Iana Seals [sic] is in fact the letter writer; and we will not speculate whether she is. However, we hereby extend the opportunity to the letter writer to contact Mr Vishnu Persaud, Public Relations Officer, GECOM with a view to bringing about acceptable resolution.
May we use this opportunity to categorically emphasize that the presentation of the ‘pink slip’ is an important component which enables the acceleration of the ID card distribution process, since it makes the ID card easily traceable. This would have been pointed out to registrants at the time of their registration when they were given the ‘pink slip.’ Even though the importance of the ‘pink slip’ was made known to registrants at the time of registration, GECOM recognized that many persons would lose/misplace theirs; hence the Commission developed an administrative procedure to facilitate the delivery of ID cards to such persons. Again, however, we must point out that this auxiliary administrative procedure involves a time consuming exercise. For this reason, every effort should be made by registrants to present the respective ‘pink slips’ when collecting their ID cards.
The problem concerning the photograph, as highlighted in the letter from Latchman Sookdeo, is not unknown to GECOM. We expected to encounter glitches, eg, poor photographs, (as in the case of Latchman Sookdeo) in the ID production system, especially since this system is being operated by humans, and notwithstanding the extensive training provided to them. Accordingly, every ID card distribution centre is equipped with a digital camera, with instructions to retake registrants’ photographs which are found to be dissimilar to the facial features of the respective registrants. Seemingly, this instruction was not applied in the case of Latchman Sookdeo.
Alternatively, affected persons will be afforded the opportunity to initiate remedial action during the Claims and Objections exercise for the upcoming Local Government Elections. The Claims and Objections exercise is scheduled to commence on December 7, 2009 within all of the 71 Local Government Areas ie, 65 Neighbourhood Democratic Councils (NDCs) and six Municipalities. We urge that such persons take advantage of this opportunity.
GECOM wishes to note that we consider it our responsibility to carry out our mandates with utmost efficiency to the satisfaction of all of our stakeholders. However, stakeholder cooperation and support is an essential prerequisite for us to optimally achieve our objectives.
Consequently, we appeal to registrants to ensure that they present their ‘pink slips’ when they go to uplift their ID cards. In so doing they would be contributing towards making the entire ID card distribution exercise a mutually satisfactory one.
Yours faithfully,
Vishnu Persaud
Public Relations Officer
Editor’s note
We asked Ms Iana Seales, a reporter at this newspaper who had written the first-mentioned letter published on November 17, whether she wished to comment on the statements made by Mr Persaud, and we received the following response:
“I raised two issues in my letter which were not addressed by Mr Persaud: firstly, that I had been advised my current ID card was a legitimate form of identification for the purposes of uplifting the new card; and secondly, that an accusation I was attempting to deceive the Commission had been levelled against me by the official in charge of the distribution centre.
“This is a serious allegation completely without foundation. I consider that no official working for GECOM should have resorted to such an uncalled for slur against a member of the public. Furthermore, the official’s response to me when I rebuffed her suggestion was totally unprofessional.
“The new card was never shown to me, and I have since learnt that this breaches the Commission’s guidelines, yet GECOM continues to maintain that the photograph on the ID card in my name is not my true image.
“I made no threats; what I said was that I would publicize what had transpired. I made no mention whatsoever of my profession or where I was employed.”
