Chief Elections Officer erases over 115,000 votes in final report to GECOM – CCJ to review case

Georgetown: The Chief Election Officer, Keith Lowenfield, has submitted a report on the election count to the Chairperson of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) erasing over 115,000 votes giving the APNU/AFC a victory.

This report is expected to be overruled by Justice Claudette Singh, Chair of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM).

In the attached submissions, the CEO declared that 171,825 valid votes were cast for the APNU+AFC while 166,343 valid votes were cast for the People’s Progressive party.

Based on his calculation, the APNU+AFC will have 33 seats in the National Assembly, with the PPP Civic gaining 31 seats and the parties on the Joined Lists gaining 1 seat.

Lowenfield presented his report to Justice Singh one day after the Court of Appeal ruled that valid votes must be used in determining the winner of the elections.

Last Thursday, at just the signal of court action, Lowenfield withheld his report, but now, even though the order of the Court of Appeal has been stayed and an appeal filed with the Caribbean Court of Justice, Lowenfield has handed in his report.

In the initial report which he submitted to GECOM, Lowenfield gave as “valid” the votes from the national recount, but now he submitted a report which is completely different.

However, original and certified figures from the recount would give PPP 33 seats to form the government. APNU+AFC would get 31 seats and the three parties – ANUG, LJP and TNM – would get one seat to complete the 65-seat National Assembly.

The Caribbean Community scrutinised recount shows the PPP won the elections with 15,000 votes ahead of the APNU+AFC.

Meanwhile, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) will no later than Wednesday issue an order that will continue to put on hold the Court of Appeal ruling in the elections results case until it hears the matter on July 1.

The CCJ through its Deputy Registrar Gizel Thomas-Roberts, in an immediate response to being notified by attorneys Anil Nandlall and Devindra Kissoon that the Chief Elections Officer Keith Lowenfield had delivered his report to the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) despite the fact that the Court of Appeal had stayed its Order, issued a direction all parties on record.

Thomas-Roberts stated: “I have been instructed by the Bench to inform that the Court will no later than Wednesday 24th June, 2020  issue an Order that (a)maintains the status quo until further order; (b) orders the holding of a CMC in this matter on Thursday 25th June, 2020 at 3:00 p.m. with a view towards (c) a full hearing of all the matters in dispute on Wednesday 1st July, 2020 at 10:00 a.m.”

Jagdeo moved to the CCJ asking for the Court to reverse the decision of Guyana’s Court of Appeal which Monday, by majority decision, chose to say that in determining the results of the elections the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) must use “valid” votes.

Nandlall and Kissoon, lead by Douglas Mendez S.C., who represent Presidential Candidate Dr Irfaan Ali and Dr. Bharrat Jagdeo, filed an application for leave to appeal to the CCJ within mere hours after the issuance of the Court of Appeal’s ruling.

As a result of the imposing filing, GECOM cancelled a meeting which was scheduled to be held at 11:00 hrs today.

In his application to the CCJ, Jagdeo argues that Court of Appeal was wrong when it held that the scope of Article 177(2) of the Constitution could be modified or amended by virtue of any Order of GECOM or at all, except for what it can explicitly inquire into, namely the qualification of a person elected as President.

He argued that the Court was wrong in interpreting Article 177(2)(b) by modifying the provision to include the word “valid” in circumstances where the Court of Appeal had no jurisdiction so to do. He said that such a modification was both unwarranted and unnecessary as well as inimical to the complex legislative scheme for the conduct of elections as framed by the Constitution and multiple Acts of Parliament.

He further submitted that Court of Appeal’s decision contravenes the Constitutional doctrine of the separation of powers by authorising GECOM to usurp the specialised jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 163 of the Constitution, which says that questions regarding the elections should be solely determined through an elections petition in the High Court.

Jagdeo further argues that what the Court of Appeal in effect did, by considering the recount order, was to review the decision of GECOM. This, he said, is in breach of Section 140(1) of the Representation of the People Act which prohibits any court from inquiring into whether any function of GECOM has been performed validly or at all.