Granger continues to conveniently complicate simple processes for his own purposes

BY: MOHABIR ANIL NANDLALL

President David Granger in his interview with Mark Benschop on Sunday night has succeeded in plunging a tortured nation into further bewilderment and anguish. After his usual sanctimonious pledge of constitutional obedience, compliance with Orders of court, and binding himself to a declaration of the election results to be made by GECOM, he has wandered off into his own frolic.

He paints a picture of how complicated and complex Guyana’s electoral process is and offered that as the reason why foreigners may not understand it. The truth is that Mr. Granger does not want to accept the results produced by the process. The Guyana electoral process has been the same since 1992. It has produced results accepted by every previous politician. The accuracy of those results may have been disputed but the process has never been. It is the same electoral process that produced victory for David Granger in 2015 so his attempt now at making the process complex and complicated is a clumsy farce.

It is the same thing that he did in relation to the process to appoint a Chairman to the Guyana Elections Commission. No other President had any difficulty in understanding the Constitution and the process, except Granger, who rejected 18 names and unilaterally appointed James Patterson in violation of the Constitution, a decision that the CCJ vacated.

In his interview with Benschop, Granger miraculously placed heavy reliance on the CARICOM observer team report, quoting liberally from it. He however failed to quote the part that said that the allegations made by APNU+AFC were false, fraudulent and ridiculous and that the recount process was credibly and transparently done, and that the results generated from the process are valid and credible.

Granger further turned the law upside down in respect of the relationship between GECOM and the Chief Election Officer. He wrongly asserted that the Chief Election Officer’s report is binding on GECOM, whatever that report contains. The truth is that the CEO is subordinate and subject to the directions of GECOM, not the reverse. Therefore, the CEO can only act upon the directions of GECOM.

His own Commissioner, Vincent Alexander, claims that in 2011, he identified a flaw in the then CEO Gocool Boodhoo’s report and thus caused the Commission to reject that report and directed Boodhoo to bring back a proper report. Well, the law has not changed since. GECOM reserves the power to reject any fraudulent report presented by any Chief Election Officer.

In light of Granger’s outrageous remarks, those who are speaking about personal sanctions should now consider whether it is not appropriate to translate their language into actions.