Letter: Public CoI versus private GECOM audit


Dear Editor,

The discussion moves forward in a fiercely contested battle as to which route we should take; that is: whether to go the route of a private, internal-type GECOM audit or that of a public, wide-sweeping CoI. Having an internal audit is the main focus of the Opposition commissioners, for the expressed reason that it would be a private, internal affair far removed from the scrutinising eyes of the public. It also means that Vincent Alexander and crew could mindlessly pontificate in a cloistered and protective environment. This is their aim; this is the purpose of them asking for an internal audit.

That proposal of theirs is all quashed with the institution of a public CoI. It should also be of note that, without any formal analysis of their presentations, they can again turn and report to the media that they have made great political mileage.

But scoring cheap political points is not the focus of our investigation into the goings-on in the last general elections; it is all about getting to the bottom of the whole sordid affair, and in the end making recommendations for the conduct of future elections.

At this stage of our discussion, I must make it abundantly clear that this is not a Vincent Alexander affair, or a PNC stomping ground. They are in no position to dictate what the parameters of the CoI ought to be; that is beyond the scope of their jurisdiction. However, they would only be required to participate, if need be, or simply hush up and be quiet. What is clear is that these guys are no more in control of the affairs of the electoral machinery.

They must recognise that this party has already gone out on a limb trumpeting nonsense that elections 2020 were rigged in favour of the PPP/C and there is an installed Government in Georgetown. So, it is already in the public domain, and what a damning accusation it is that it would take only a public CoI to erase that foolishness from our airwaves. Again, I say this asininity could only go away with a public CoI conducted under international scrutiny.

It is for this reason that the Government of the day is determined that the Opposition loudmouths do not get away with it. All persons and intellectual planners in this rigging alliance must be brought to light. For too long, this kind of nonsense has been in the public domain, and it is high time that some semblance of order and discipline be brought into our electoral system.

This is a perennial problem that has plagued the Guyanese Society at election time, and the blame must fall squarely at the feet of the main Opposition PNC.
I say there should be no tampering with state documents, there should be no five-month wait for the results of an election. Down with fraudulent people and a fraudulent Opposition.

At the end of this CoI, it is my hope that there should be the strongest message sent ever: frauds and fraudulent transactions would not be tolerated in a Guyana society. We can all say, “Never again!”

Neil Adams