Dear Editor,
I must start off by saying I generally do not read the Guyana Chronicle unless someone sends me a news item. Such was the case yesterday, May 04, 2020, when I was forwarded an article headlined ‘Enough is Enough’, a headline that incidentally harkens back to a PNC campaign jingle. This article claims that an advertisement that in my view provides clear evidence of the chairwoman of GECOM, Ms. Claudette Singh’s attempt to undermine a recount process, was “cowardly, nasty and misogynistic” – I say to these professional women, really?
Where were these ‘professional’ women when three women from the Guyana Gold Board were daily, for almost a full month, attacked in the newspapers, slandered and stripped of their professional reputation for simply doing their jobs and what was required of them by law, to increase the gold declarations of this country – a declaration of 714,000 ounces of gold which to date has not been matched by the Gold Board? Where were these ‘professional’ women when three women were removed from their jobs because of two of their names (Ramotar, Seelochan) and their perceived political affiliations? Why were these ‘professional’ women not lending support to these three women when the head of SOCU who headed the investigation against them was himself removed from office due to corruption? I will tell you where they were, they were nowhere because I dare say that the concept of professionalism has been eroded by the PNC in Guyana and those ‘professional’ women do not understand professionalism, they view the world through the prism of politics.
Most people in my generation would have heard from their parents and read about rigged elections of the 70s and 80s in Guyana. Many people who lived through those rigged days suspected the PNC would resort to their old rigging ways, but many, including me dismissed those suspicions thinking that such cannot happen in our 21st Century Guyana – what a mistaken thought!
Claudette Singh as the chairwoman of GECOM has had over 60 days to deliver to Guyanese a free and fair election process which includes a credible, fair and transparent tabulation process but to date, 63 days later she has not done so. Instead, under her chairmanship a few days after the March 2nd elections, and with cameras recording there was a fraudulent declaration of those elections using a spreadsheet. The courts subsequently ruled that the SOPs must be used to declare district 4 results yet under Claudette Singh’s chairmanship GECOM ignored a court ruling and attempted once again to declare the results based on the same spreadsheet. This caused protests from the Guyanese population and the international community. The Opposition Leader Mr. Bharrat Jagdeo and APNU+AFC’s Presidential Candidate Mr. David Granger attempted to save the election with an agreed CARICOM-witnessed recount of votes, but under Claudette Singh’s chairmanship while she was reported to have undertaken such recount, with her commitment being bolstered by a request of Mr. Granger, she dragged a simple recount decision process out putting up hurdles and to many she was perceived giving enough time for a PNC candidate to object to the recount. I will not even speak about the shame and embarrassment she has caused to decent minded Guyanese to have senior CARICOM officials wasting their time sitting around for almost one week awaiting for a recount to commence. As chairperson of GECOM Claudette Singh has voted against every resolution proposed by the PPP that would lend transparency to this elections process. The Mingo declarations have been rejected by the courts, yet Claudette Singh is not throwing out those declarations, instead they are held in abeyance. Now, we hear that a recount will commence on Wednesday May 6th. Thanks to her past conduct it will be difficult to find any fair thinking Guyanese believing that the recount will actually begin on Wednesday.
Her conduct over the past 63 days speaks at best of her being weak and at worst it points to her harbouring some sinister motive.
It serves feminism no good promoting weakness or openly encouraging wrongdoings of women.
If a woman commits an act that is damaging to a society she must be roundly condemned because at the end of the day gender equality is done no favours when a wrong by a woman is given a free pass. It would have been heartening if those same women spoke up when my colleagues and I were, baselessly slandered. Alas, that time has passed, but there is still time for these and all of us women to raise our collective voices for what is right and fair. Let us demand that the people’s will be heard. Let us demand that this recount be credible, free, fair and transparent, so that our people, women and men, can live in a society that upholds democracy and the rule of law.
Yours faithfully,
Lisaveta Ramotar
