The caretaker President has rewritten the rule-book for the rigging of elections. The blue-print given by the Economist for such an exercise is, “First, use state resources to bribe, fool and bully people before the poll. Once voting starts, stuff the ballot boxes or fiddle the tallies. Afterwards, make sure the army and judges are on your side in case opponents take their case to the streets or to the courts.”
There is one minor and two major amendments to this strategy where Guyana is concerned, the minor one being the fact that here the army is rarely called out to deal with elections protestors; it is normally a task assigned to the police. The last time the GDF was used in this connection was in 1992, when then President Desmond Hoyte deployed them in certain central areas prior to the swearing in of Dr Cheddi Jagan, and they did use live ammunition. It should be noted, however, that this was done in the interest of democracy, not of electoral fraud.
A more serious omission where this country is concerned, is the Elections Commission, which is absolutely critical to the outcome of polls. Putting placemen or women in the Secretariat allows for the ‘fiddling’ of the tallies, as the London magazine puts it, and our problems with fraud in relation to the March 2nd election begin right there under the management of unprincipled employees such as Messrs Keith Lowenfield and Clairmont Mingo.
It is in another respect entirely, however, that President Granger has revolutionised how these things are done. While the normal practice is for opponents challenging a fraudulent election to resort to the courts, it is hardly known for an incumbent who is relying on the dishonest tabulation of a result to stay in power, to use the law in order to achieve that end. But that is exactly what the de facto head of state has done. While the opposition of necessity has been forced to apply to the courts, more especially initially in respect of Mr Mingo’s imaginary figures, that is not what has been holding up the declaration of a result for four-and-a-half months; rather it is the government’s own legal challenges operating in coordination with the actions of Gecom officials. These legal approaches have been directed towards the prevention of a recount process, the rejection of the recount results and now the blocking of the Gecom Chair from declaring the winner of the March 2nd election.
In all of these cases, the critical one of which went to the Caribbean Court of Justice, which made a very clear ruling that the recount should be used as the basis on which to declare a result, the government as such is not the entity which has brought the actions. That has fallen to APNU members or supporters whom no one outside the party and perhaps only a limited number within it, have ever heard of.
The first of these was Ms Ulita Moore, who filed a court action to stop the recount, even although the Caricom team was already in the country following an agreement between Messrs Granger and Jagdeo. At first it was thought that dilatoriness and reticence were responsible for the de facto President’s failure to rein in Ms Moore, who, it was assumed, was acting at the behest of elements in her party. After all, it seemed unthinkable that a head of government would deliberately bring his fellow Caricom heads here under false pretences. Given what has happened since, however, President Granger’s good faith on that occasion must now be in question, and his reputation in the region on that account hardly salvageable, never mind the issue of the results per se.
The second challenge was brought by Ms Eslyn David, and as mentioned above, that case went all the way to the CCJ, which overruled the decision of the Appeal Court, which it said had no jurisdiction to hear the case. Thereafter, the nation waited with bated breath to hear Justice Claudette Singh declare a result, but the ever dependable Mr Lowenfield did not disappoint his sponsors, and for the fourth time failed to produce a report based on the recount results. He still has not been fired, and now everything at the commission level is once again in suspension because a Ms Misenga Jones has gone to court seeking to block the Gecom Chair from declaring the winner of the March 2nd polls on the basis of the recount.
Judging from previous experience, one imagines that whatever the outcome, the matter could potentially be appealed to a higher court. Surely the delay engendered by this kind of Mephistophelean waltz between corrupt Gecom officials and the bringing of frivolous legal challenges must be a first in the world in terms of electoral fraud. It makes Malawi’s recent efforts to rig votes by altering them with Tipp-Ex seem quite rudimentary in comparison. (The older generation here will remember Tipp-Ex as a white-out fluid for correcting typed copy.)
This legal dance, however, cannot go on for ever. Those who are set on rigging must run out of court options eventually, while Mr Lowenfield will in due course be relieved of his duties, and whoever succeeds him will presumably also be relieved of theirs if they do not comply with Justice Singh’s instructions. However it plays out, there should eventually be a declaration informed by the recount results. But can we all then relax? Maybe not, considering the caretaker President’s latest remarks.
On Wednesday the Ministry of the Presidency issued a statement that President Granger “would abide by any declaration that the Chairman [of the Elections Commission] makes in keeping with the laws of Guyana.” What on earth, muttered the political cognoscenti, does this mean? The de facto head of state had been quite consistent until this week in assuring everyone that he would abide by the declaration of the Gecom Chair, but now the addition of the words “in keeping with the laws of Guyana” puts that purported commitment in doubt.
Since he has already stood by Mr Lowenfield’s calculations and disenfranchisement of more than 15,000 voters, what is his intention if Justice Singh makes a declaration, which in law she is bound to do, in consonance with the recount? So far the High Court and Guyana’s highest court, the CCJ, have punctiliously applied the law and the Constitution, and once Mr Lowenfield goes too, what other avenue is open to him to be sworn in as Guyana’s new president except one which no one wants to even think about?
The caretaker President has played the legal game almost to its conclusion; the country faces swingeing economic sanctions if he is sworn in, while all those associated with rigging, and possibly their families as well, will also face visa restrictions to the US, as has been made clear by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. What exactly is it that Mr Granger thinks he has to gain by persisting?
