Max wrong while Claudette right on fraud

Dear Editor,

During the early 1980s, Max Mohammed joined a group of us in NY combating Burnhamism and electoral rigging. But today, he supports Lowenfield rigging of disenfranchising over 115K votes without due process. Max misunderstands the law on elections. Lowenfield and GECOM have no powers to investigate complaints or allegations on electoral fraud after election day. Lowenfield has no powers to disenfranchise voters. GECOM is not clothed with the powers of a court to look into fraudulent voting. Complaints should have been filed on election day to deter fraud. Once the election is completed and ballots counted and accepted by the Commission (Chair), complaints must be undertaken by a court. Max is reminded that the incumbent claimed victory on March 5 and again on March 13. Now he can’t change the narrative and claim ‘tief men’ deter the victories.

Lowenfield and GECOM have no powers to investigate complaints or allegations on electoral fraud after election day. Lowenfield has no powers to disenfranchise voters. He simply has to prepare a report based on a count or recount as instructed by the chair and work out the allocation of seats. He has no other power. And GECOM is not clothed with the powers of a court to look into alleged fraudulent voting as the chair rightly sworn to in an affidavit to the court. Complaints of fraud must be filed and investigated on election day. Once the election is completed and ballots counted and certified by GECOM, any complaint must be inquired into by the high court. Lowenfield must carry out the order of the Chair who instructed him to prepare a final report for declaration.

Max is reminded that the incumbent PNC/R coalition claimed victory on March 5 and again on March 13. Now victors can’t somersault and conveniently change the narrative and claim also that “tief men” robbed them (PNC/R) of their proclaimed victory.

Max has set sail in a world of illusion. He is actually giving life to the absurd allegations that the dead and the migrated voted on March 2. This can’t be compared with his analogy of a thief breaking into one’s home and the owner calling the police during or after the robbery was committed. Actually, if indeed the dead and migrated voted, then that act was already committed. Now in the case of a break and enter, one call in the police with judicial intervention.

Max should know that when someone breaks into a home, the head of the home first has to ensure that the “tief man” was not there to cheat on a spouse, or it could be that someone at home had locked the spouse out and has been trying to break in to gain entry. Apart from that, if a stranger indeed breaks and enters your home and begins to steal objects, the quickest way to handle the situation is either to incapacitate him or call the police at any time during the stealing process. This is a case where a crime was being committed. It satisfied the three elements of a crime: motive, means and opportunity. The case with the elections is completely different.

If there were attempts at electoral fraud during election then these must be investigated and stopped during the act of commission, not four months after the alleged act. Assuming that there were instances of fraud, it is GECOM’s (Lowenfield staff) responsibility to stop these during the act of commission. Failure to do this, means that Lowenfield abdicated his responsibility and failed miserably in his management of the election and therefore ought to tender his resignation forthwith.

The claims of impersonation and dead people voting are not only mere allegations, but also preposterous. No one had seen a dead person voting while I admit that one party did appeal to the dead to wake up and vote. Max knows that party. And no one witnessed voter impersonation; Max knows which party has had a history of voter impersonation. No evidence was proffered to substantiate allegations of fraud.

All allegations, according to news reports, on voter fraud were debunked. The dead did not vote as happened prior to 1992; such type of rigging was opposed by Max himself when he joined our movement in the early 1980s against fraud. Regrettably, he now seems to be a defender of rigging. Even Lowenfield admitted that under the current robust system, it’s impossible to impersonate any voter. If Max saw any dead voting, could he please apprise me as I want some deceased people to visit my home.

Max made the common mistake like Lowenfield by elevating allegations to the level of crime, when there is no credible evidence. He should know that claims of impersonation were debunked by voters coming forward and who swore in affidavits that they were in Guyana and did vote. Many of them never left Guyana for any country abroad. Perhaps Max can convince the dead to rise from the grave or ashes and state that they indeed voted!

Max must also know that neither GECOM nor Lowenfield has the authority to determine that a voter committed electoral fraud four months ago. That responsibility resides in the High Court of Guyana. GECOM’s Chair herself, a distinguished judge, holds this position. Any party with allegations must proceed to seek judicial relief via an election petition. In 2015, Donald Ramotar alleged election irregularities. It was not GECOM’s task to investigate those matters before a declaration of the results in 2015 was made. David Granger was sworn in as President. The PPP/C filed a petition as permitted by the law. Max conveniently ignored this important point.

Max should ask all the parties to submit their SOPs received on March 2 for cross references. He would have recognized that those SOPs and the SORs were almost similar and as confirmed by Caricom monitors. Max is pretending otherwise. One must not suppress or distort findings of the Caricom high-level team that speaks to the credibility of the recount process. Granger said publicly that Caricom was the most legitimate interlocutor, although he has regrettably backpedaled on this position. The Caricom team said that those making allegations were on a “fishing expedition”, adding that the results of the recount formed the basis for a declaration of the results.

Max deliberately ignored Mingo’s voter tabulation fraud on March 5, 2020 which was the most transparent rigging ever to have happened in Guyana and perhaps the world. He also failed to acknowledge the greater fraud perpetrated by Lowenfield on June 23, 2020 when he disenfranchised 115, 844 voters. Those voters took time, effort and sacrifice to cast their votes and followed all the rules that were overseen by observer teams and political parties. Yet one man, without any authority or right, arbitrarily decided to rob 115,844 voters who properly and legally exercised their franchise. If there were problems then, it was Lowenfield who was not diligent in identifying those and as such was in dereliction of his duties on March 2. He should resign NOW for this and other glaring aberrations.
Max is engaged in sideshows and diverting attention from Mingo’s and Lowenfield’s massive fraud, trying to replace that with disingenuous information and political propaganda.

Belching out a set of polemics and political platitudes to cover a most brutal, naked and vicious electoral fraud perpetrated by GECOM in collusion with PNC/R, is even more cruel that the fraud itself. One truth about this election is the recount was legal and credible. And that shows that the PPP/C won the election convincingly. No amount of changing narratives and sideshows can alter this reality. I call on my brother Max to rejoin the movement against electoral fraud and salute Claudette for following the law.

Yours truly,
Dr. Vishnu Bisram