Dear Editor,
Up to the end of the third day of the recount of votes cast in the March 2 elections, GECOM had completed a total of 108 boxes, or 4.62% of the 2,339 ballot boxes. While GECOM did not announce the number of votes, my independent and reliable source informed me that the number was 16,692 which is 3.75% of the estimated 444,702 votes made up as follows:
Day 2 over day one showed a 60% increase in the number of boxes and a 50% increase in the number of votes recounted while day 3 over day 2 had a 10% increase in the number of boxes and an impressive 41% increase in the number of votes recounted. It appears that the low numbers of boxes and votes on day 1 was mainly due to the delayed start to clarify and resolve some basic details of processes. It is probably too early to say whether and how far this is the beginning of a trend which would influenced by resources, the learning curve and the fatigue factor. GECOM has a large pool of employees and seemingly unlimited funds from which to draw and to rotate staff.
Among the Coalition agents are some paid national and regional public servants, including two ministers, two public officers and one seconded union President. This is such a disgraceful misuse of taxpayers’ money that should spark anger and resentment, but that is an aside. From the other side, agents of the newer parties and the PPP/C come from their party cadres. The number of domestic observers has been reduced significantly by GECOM because of COVID–19 social distancing rules placing a heavy burden on the volunteers some of whom will need to re- acclimatise to sunlight, get home at 8 o’clock in the evening and are back on the road at 6:15 AM next day. They are aware too of the additional responsibility they bear as a result of the far fewer number of international observers: the Carter Center has effectively been shut out for now, the OAS is now represented by a single individual while the Commonwealth Secretariat could not observe the recount. Those domestic observers are indeed Guardians of Democracy, some of them like Kian Jabour and Jonathan Yearwood, doubly so.
We recall that GECOM had projected 25 days for the recount, so widely aspirational that it sounds like fantasy. Of course, everyone or perhaps most persons would like to see the count conclude early and I myself had predicted the number of counting days to be 47, based on an estimate of 9,600 votes counted per day with a smooth running process. That process is determined not only by GECOM personnel but by the process which is set out in section 87 of the Representation of the People Act (ROPA) and the challenges made by Party representatives in the recount.
The process is turning out to be anything but smooth or in accordance with the law. Unfortunately, the fears I had expressed in the media about frivolous objections being raised are coming to pass after the GECOM Chairman’s support of an unlawful process designed to shape the recount. Section 89 (2) of the ROPA expressly prohibits the “open[ing] of the sealed packets containing tendered ballot papers, marked copies of the official list of electors or part thereof or counterfoils of used ballot papers.”
One can ask why Ms. Claudette Singh, a former jurist, would allow an illegal process to take place. She has clearly stood on the side of the APNU+AFC Commissioners to misuse the text and intent of section 22 of the Elections Law (Amendment) Act of 2002. This section clothes GECOM with the power to take certain acts where “any difficulty arises in connection with the application of the Act or the Representation of the People Act ….” The action by Singh and the Commissioners has in fact done the opposite: it has facilitated the introduction of difficulties towards the goal of the Government Commissioners and senior officers of GECOM to have the elections fraudulently declared in favour of Granger and the APNU+AFC Coalition.
From my conversations with persons present at the count, it is clear that the APNU+AFC Coalition has been using the latitude of the relaxation of section 89 (2) to carry out an audit which only weeks ago their lawyers were strongly arguing in court was a matter for an election petition. The Coalition representatives, clearly working in unison, have been raising the same kinds of questions in each counting stations: are bringing travel and migration data into the process suggesting collusion among the APNU+AFC Coalition, GECOM and the Immigration Service; wanting to examine the serial numbers of votes cast by reference to Polling Station data; and challenging decisions by GECOM staff and party agents in the Polling Stations. Some of these violate the whole principle of the secrecy of the vote but as the count progresses and the loss by the Coalition becomes more imminent, I will not be surprised by even more absurd antics, attempts and actions.
Where do I now stand on the completion of the recount date? With the usual caveats, the benefit of three days of recounts and a net 15 % improvement in efficiency, the count can be completed in the first half of July. After next week’s recounts are in, I will be in a position to give a more accurate projection, plus or minus two days.
We are about to enter the eleventh week following the March 2 elections. We still have a long way to go for the recount to be completed and hopefully, the return to some normalcy. Claudette Singh, Mingo, Lowenfield, Alexander and Granger with an average age in excess of seventy-five years should just pause, if they have that in them, to consider the consequences of their action to the young people of this country.
Yours faithfully,
Christopher Ram
