Anyone who thought the de facto President was just a puppet on a string whom diehard party elements along with former military personnel were just manipulating, was forced to revise that judgement on Monday when the caretaker head of state emerged from behind the curtain and revealed himself as the puppet-master. In an interview he told Benschop Radio that he accepted the report by Chief Election Officer Keith Lowenfield which had invalidated 25% of the votes in the March 2 election. Under the calculations contained in that report APNU+AFC would be returned to office. Furthermore, he said that Gecom was bound to make a declaration based on Lowenfield’s report rather than on the certified results of the National Recount. “It’s a logical process,” he averred, not a “disorderly” one.
What he described might not have been ‘disorderly’, but it did not reflect the law. Gecom is not bound to make a declaration on the basis of the Chief Election Officer’s final report. The de facto President also cited a section in the Caricom report on the recount in an attempt to bolster his position, pointing to where the team had acknowledged irregularities and had recommended an investigation into matters such as missing statutory documents, and that there be a total re-registration of electors, the re-structuring of the Elections Commission and a political audit. However, he completely omitted to mention the central conclusion of the authors, namely, that the recount results reflected the will of the people.
He was in fact tackled on that issue by this newspaper subsequently, and we quoted him as responding: “[E]very word I issued came from the recommendations of the Caricom report … Those words didn’t come from the sky, they came from the recommendation.” He appeared oblivious to the tangential nature of his answer.
But while what he said on Monday was unequivocal, even before that President Granger had given signals that he had decided to ignore the facts, law, principle and the good of the country. Earlier this week, for example, he named a new acting Chief of Staff of the GDF, an appointment which would normally have to await the inauguration of a new president, while last week he was telling members of the army that they would benefit from increased training under the decade of development. Apparently he suffered not even a hint of unease that he would not be the one to usher in even five years of ‘development’, never mind a whole decade.
So now we have it from the horse’s mouth, so to speak, rather than just from spokesmen like Mr Joseph Harmon, that Mr Granger does not intend to relinquish office. It has done nothing to soothe the anxieties of the nation, whose citizens now visualise all kinds of unhealthy scenarios developing. It is true that on Wednesday the de facto President qualified his earlier statement by saying that he is waiting for the Gecom Chair to make a declaration “when she is ready”, and that when she does he would “abide by that declaration.” He went on to explain that his decision to wait on the Commission reflected the fact that the executive branch did not have a role in managing elections; under the Constitution that fell only to Gecom.
The electorate will not forget, however, that while he has always been at pains to insist that the executive cannot interfere in the work of Gecom, on this occasion he has done precisely that. How else is one to interpret his endorsement of the Lowenfield report, and his comments that the Commission was obliged to make a declaration grounded in that when he knows full well that Chair Claudette Singh had required the CEO to compile a report based on the recount results? Mr Lowenfield in defiance of his instructions did not do that, and he justified the submission of the report he did produce by making reference to the Appeal Court ruling which specified “more valid votes” rather than just “more votes”, which is the original wording in the Constitution. What President Granger has done is give the appearance of transmitting a not very subtle message to Justice Singh about her declaration.
And the matter of the election results are not the only area where President Granger is speaking out of two sides of his mouth. There is also the matter of the consequences of an illegal swearing in. The major western democracies have made their position clear in that regard, not least of all the Americans, who from the State Department to senators and congressmen have been emphasising the importance of a free and fair result. The State Department in particular, has not been reticent about intimating that sanctions would be in the offing should there be an illegal outcome to the March 2 poll. As recently as this week US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said he had instructed his Department to have all those who undermine Guyana’s democracy held accountable. In terms of diplomatic-speak, what could be clearer, one would have thought?
But last week there was the Ministry of the Presidency reporting President Granger from an undated interview as emphasising that “the United States of America is a friend and has worked closely with Guyana over several decades through several organizations … Guyana is part of the Western Hemisphere. We have very cordial relations with the United States from defence, economy and security points of view.” Reference was made to this country’s cooperation with Southern Command on transnational crimes, while the de facto President also made mention of the mutually beneficial defence, economic, political and social relations since Independence, and the “deepening cooperation” in fields which were named.
So what we have here is a gargantuan credibility gap. On the one hand Mr Granger touts the cordial relations with the US, while on the other he knows that that nation for its part is effectively threatening sanctions if there is an illegal swearing in. On the one hand Mr Granger supports Mr Lowenfield’s final report, and on the other he is aware that that official has disobeyed Gecom’s instructions and has not undertaken his tabulations in accordance with them. On the one hand he knows that Caricom has validated the recount votes and that is the gravamen of its report, and on the other he disregards that completely and cites a recommendation which is irrelevant to the central issue of verified ballots.
On the one hand he maintains the Gecom Chair must make a declaration of results based on the Lowenfield report, and on the other he will be conscious of the fact that this is not what the applicable law says. On the one hand he insists that the executive cannot interfere in the work of Gecom, and on the other he does just that. How can one man, and a de facto head of state at that, be so divorced from reality?
Or is he really divorced from reality? Is it just that he is the most cynical, self-seeking head of state we have ever had – and this country is no stranger to cynical heads of state. Added to that does he take the citizens for fools? Is it that he is so arrogant he thinks ordinary people will not notice all the contradictions and inconsistencies, and that whatever he determines they should be told at any given point in time, they will accept because it comes from him, no matter how nonsensical? Has he extrapolated from Ms Barbara Pilgrim who told APNU+AFC supporters in New Amsterdam that they should only listen to party officials, and no one else?
Or is there a more fundamental problem, in so far as he is so desperate to remain in power, that he really doesn’t notice all the incongruities and paradoxes within his own stances? If that is so then he really is indeed divorced from reality, and his judgement will be severely distorted. Or is he one of those who is convinced that the ends justify the means, and that since the ‘end’ that he should serve another term – or two – is desirable in itself (at least in his own mind) it really doesn’t matter how he achieves it?
Whatever the case he should understand that he has lost respect both locally and internationally and is seen as dishonourable. He will achieve at least partial redemption if even at this late stage he takes the path of righteousness, to use a biblical phrase. Any other avenue will make him a pariah internationally, locally and, it might be added, in the history books.
