Share
Could APNU/AFC’s election petitions be expedited?

Could APNU/AFC’s election petitions be expedited?

Dear Editor,
The question on everyone’s mind is: Could the APNU/AFC’s election petitions be expedited so that a quick-fix decision can be made at the earliest? And the answer is a resounding, ‘No!’
In the first place, the second petition filed should have been thrown out immediately because it was filed way beyond the legally due date, and in strict legal compliance, it ought to have been thrown out. However, knowing the PNC and the con game they are accustomed to, wherein every illegal avenue is exploited, the judge has acceded to hear the two in a combined whole.

In the second instance, the voluminous document is riddled with inaccuracies and repetitions, placed there with the clear aim of taking up much of the court’s time. It is the PNC’s erroneous belief that the wordier their petition is, the more bogged down the court would become, and somehow, somewhere give in to their demands.

But, sorry pals, that is not going to happen; the court is going to deal with the substance of your claim, and, at the end of it all, make a definitive ruling.
So, let us get back to the question I posed earlier: Could an election petition be expedited? And the answer is no. The erudite, no-nonsense Chief Justice has already hinted to the applicants that every piece of allegation, every anomaly raised by the Opposition, must be comprehensively addressed; while, at the same time, all documents held by GECOM would have to be tendered in court.

Now, here is where the rubber hits the road, because Lowenfield and his rigging associates in the PNC are adamant that they can hold secret certain key documents pertaining to the elections, while relying on raw street-side hearsay testimony to pilot their case. The jumbie stories recited by many in the PNC, that dead people voted, would also require those who can see ghosts and separate ghost votes from legal ones having to come forward and produce their evidence. All of those ghosts would have to be put to the test by solid evidence. If this cannot be done, then that part of their petitions is a dead deal. If that aspect of their petitions isn’t madness, then what is?

CEO Lowenfield would have to provide evidence of his four-time submission of figures presented after the recount, and juxtapose those against the official SOPs of Region 4. In each instance mentioned above, exhibits would have to be tendered in court.

At the end of the day, things of this nature take time, and it is my firm belief that election petitions of this magnitude cannot be successfully concluded within a year’s time.
I would like to give the creole interpretation to this futility, but the interest of modesty and the use of appropriate language apply. Suffice it to say that the creole term succinctly explains the actions of the APNU/AFC Opposition in these petitions.
So, with bated breath, Guyana and the world anxiously await the opening of these election petitions’ hearing.

Respectfully,
Neil Adams

Leave a Comment