When democracy prevails at GECOM, the political opposition cries foul

Nov 03, 2024 Letters

---

Dear Editor,

I write in response to a letter headlined ‘PPP has embarked on the capture of GECOM;’ and ‘PPP’s capture of GECOM continues unabated’ published on 31.10.’24 in S/N and K/N respectively. The authors of the latter are GECOM Commissioners Trotman, Corbin and Alexander who represent the interests of the APNU+AFC on the Commission.

Ever since it split from the PPP in 1955 It has been the nature of the psyche of persons belonging to the PNC who hold high office to use mental shortcuts or a self-serving rule of thumb to judge situations, rank preferences and to assess people. The use of race as a mental shortcut has, and continues to be a sine qua non of the PNC’s modus operandi in the political arena.

The habitual resort to cry foul when the APNU+AFC doesn’t get its way at GECOM is rooted in the mistaken belief that they are the gate keepers for GECOM’S electoral machinery. However, with the gate to GECOM now unchained and wide open allowing for fresh air and new recruits to enter has created a sense of electoral insecurity for the APNU+AFC.

Judgement by the letter’s signatories as regards the applicant’s suitability and qualifications to fill vacancies for the posts of Civil and Voter Education Manager (C&VEM) and Logistics Manager (LM) respectively, was obviously not the product of careful consideration on their part.

The APNU+AFC should cease any more chatter about ‘PPP’s capture of GECOM’ since they themselves had embarked not only on the capture, but on a wrecking spree at GECOM during the 2015-2020 period. It began when Mr. James Patterson, was handpicked and in violation of the constitution, made chairman for GECOM (2017-2019). Secondly, while incumbency and experience were emphasized by APNU+AFC as criteria to be successful applicants for the jobs, those very

attributes were completely ignored when in 2018, GECOM had to select someone to fill the post of Deputy CEO. The APNU+AFC bypassed Vishnu Persaud and chose Roxanne Myers instead to fill the post of Deputy CEO of GECOM. The Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC) was called upon to investigate the matter; it’s Report showed how the PNC ‘captured GECOM.’

At GECOM, as was consensually agreed, a process to shortlist, interview, assess and to select persons to fill the posts of C&VEM and LM managers was profusely democratic from beginning to end. At every stage of the process, all six commissioners participated. Every applicant was given all the time they needed to answer questions posed to them by the Chairman and Commissioners.

At a separate session, commissioners offered their individual assessments of each applicant ending with their individual recommendation for the best qualified person to fill the post of C&VEM and then the LM. The Chair presided over the entire process and shared her own assessment and recommendations for the two posts with commissioners.

At a duly constituted meeting of GECOM, commissioners Trotman, Corbin and Alexander freely advanced the names of their preferred candidates, so did commissioners Narayan, Rohee and Gunraj. There was no coincidence in nominations between the six commissioners on any of the nominees save for the coincidence of nominations between the chairman and Narayan, Rohee and Gunraj. If this process was not democratic, then what is?

No voting nor imposition of preferences took place nor was the exercise corrupted in any shape or form. Therefore, for the three opposition-sponsored commissioners to suggest that GECOM was ‘captured’ by the PPP is to misrepresent a process that was truly transparent and democratic as agreed to by all commissioners.

To appreciate the significance of GECOM’S decision-making process nowadays, it is important to cast our minds back to the 2015-2020 period and let our imagination take flight to a situation where the APNU+AFC cabal is still in power, along with their handpicked chairman, the three APNU+AFC-sponsored commissioners, the CEO, his deputy, and others who are currently before the Court. One can imagine what would have happened were all these persons still in their respective positions at GECOM. In that scenario, it would be no mystery to recognize the backward causes such an eventuality would have served. A cursory look around would show the immense difference with no comparison whatsoever between the Granger and Ali administrations as regards democracy and inclusiveness.

For the three commissioners to accuse the PPP of ‘degutting GECOM of African Guyanese and to corruptly replace them with ‘pro-PPP Indo-Guyanese handpicked by the PPP’ is to throw dust in the eyes of Guyanese and, as is customary, to use the racial card as a means to an end. Contrary to the allegations of the three commissioners, the data below shows the ethnic composition of the senior and middle level management staff at GECOM from 2020 to present:

Instead of making accusatory statements about ‘PPP capturing GECOM,’ Alexander and company should recognize that from time to time it is history, not men that pushes a reset button, driving change either at an institutional, individual or societal level. And It is only by surveying history’s full sweep, we can appreciate the societal dynamics that correspondingly, drive the process of change. If it is such changes that make the three commissioners cringe, then it is obvious that the extant democratic proceedings at GECOM is perhaps their bete noire.

The commissioners’ claims are contradictory to the Guyanese electorate’s persistent demand for free and fair election in the future, and by a commission that is fully equipped in its human capacity and technologically and to be fit for purpose in order to produce and deliver election results in a timely manner.

Guyanese want a well-functioning electoral machinery that can prosper by adapting to the liberal democratic environment obtaining in our country. The commissioners’ arguments are therefore crude, baseless and without merit, pure and simple. The future they envisage cannot be that what the future holds for Guyana.

GECOM must have the all-round capacity as an organization that drives a democratic electoral process with unquestionable tendencies and a favorable disposition to act always in accordance with the constitution; in a predictable and transparent manner. GECOM is duty bound to fulfill that role at present in the here and now while it prepares for election 2025

In the circumstances, it seems obvious that the APNU+AFC refuses to be mentally integrated to the whole concept of change. Reluctance, if not resistance to changes at GECOM, cannot be only when it is suits them knowing full well that it doesn’t work that way.

The APNU+AFC should accept that change opens the door to new and refreshing ways of thinking and innovation far removed from the era of dictatorship, electoral rigging.

Before the three commissioners continue to harp on their claim of a ‘bloated list’ they should say how many of the 207,787 votes they received in the 2015 General and Regional Election were bloated.

And as regards the 2023 Local Government Elections, the PNC should tell us how many of the 20,845 votes they received at the municipality of Georgetown were bloated; how many of the 3,074 votes they received at the municipality of New Amsterdam were bloated and finally, how many of the 8,002 votes they received at the municipality of Linden were bloated

The 2020 election and events thereafter swept up the Guyanese people to defend democracy. Elections 2025 will undoubtedly see the Guyanese people mobilized once again for another round of struggle for democracy and free and fair elections as the APNU+AFC continues their march of folly lurching from one fit of political madness to another.

Yours faithfully,

Clement J. Rohee

(When democracy prevails at GECOM, the political opposition cries foul)

---

• APNU+AFC, GECOM, Logistics Manager, Roxanne Myers’, Voter Education Manager

---