PPP/C’s criticism of 156-day recount proposal malicious – Alexander

Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Commissioner, Vincent Alexander, has stated that, while all sorts of criticism have been levelled against the Commission in the past, the most recent, condemning Chief Elections Officer (CEO), Keith Lowenfield, for the 156-day proposal is “unfounded, ridiculous and malicious”.

In a letter to the Editor, Alexander said that the mere fact that the proposal, of a timeframe for the national recount, is being referred to as the “Lowenfield proposal”, is the basis upon which the public has been misguided.

He stated that, unfortunately, this misguidance has come in part from the public report of Opposition-nominated Commissioners whose proposals guided Lowenfield in his calculations.

From the inception, realizing that Article 162 of the Constitution and section 22 of the Elections Laws (Amendment) Act do not specify procedures for a recount, the CEO had stated that he would be relying on the guidance of the Commission.

As such, written submissions and oral guidance were given to the CEO and he was instructed to craft a suitable timeframe.

Alexander said that, in those submissions, Opposition-nominated Commissioner, Robeson Benn proposed: “two (2) paired Commissioners must initial the recount statement of poll.” (sic) and “two (2) paired Commissioners to sign accepted Tabulation forms.” (sic).

Based on these and other factors, the CEO estimated that it will take approximately two hours to count one ballot box and, with a total of three work stations, operating simultaneously, for a period of 10 hours daily, the counting of 2,339 ballot boxes would take 156 days.

“It is that articulation, given that there can only be three sets of paired Commissioners, which caused the proposal to suggest the use of only three workstations,” Alexander said.

“The CEO may have misunderstood Benn`s proposal. However, he should not be lambasted as if he originated the idea of three workstations. Moreso, since the document was a working/draft document; and Commissioner Benn clarified the apparent misunderstanding for consideration in the furtherance of the finalization of the document.”

At the Commission’s meeting where the CEO presented the 156-day draft operational plan, it was agreed that the Commission would meet again in a few days to re-examine the plan and how the timeframe can be reduced.

Even so, Alexander said that the Opposition-nominated Commissioners exited GECOM that afternoon reporting their disbelief to the media on the calculated days as if Lowenfield acted on his own guidance.

“I think we are still in the realm of being misled, misinterpreted and that the secretariat itself is not being helpful,” Commissioner Benn had told the media.
“I am telling you, fundamentally, in no way, shape or form, should we have been provided with a document, which gives that type of duration.”

Alexander stated in his letter: “The document did not benefit from detailed discussions, since Commissioner [Sase]Gunraj, almost preemptively, sought permission to prepare another version, which he subsequently submitted as a joint document of Gunraj/Benn/Shadick, now acclaimed as a PPP/C submission. Permission was granted. It was therefore disingenuous and unethical for Commissioners to take to the media as if Lowenfield had conjured some plot to have the recount done in 156 days…the instigated conclusion of the public and personal ridicule of Lowenfield in person are grossly mis- and ill-informed. The Commissioners’ ridicule is at least malicious, albeit that Commissioner Gunraj grudgingly admitted that the proposal may have been influenced, in part, and, fundamentally, by Benn`s submission.”

The Commissioner said that the “antagonistic Commissioners” also argued that it took just one night to do the original count when compared this with the 156-day timeline.

However, Alexander said that what must be logically compared is the 156 days which is equivalent to 1,560 hours [ten hours daily] as opposed to Election night where there were 2,339 simultaneous counts that would have taken 2,339 hours if one were to allot 1 hour on average to each ballot box.

“There could be nothing short of mischief for Commissioners to cast aspersions on a 1,560-hour sequential count juxtaposed to the E day 2,339-hour simultaneous/lateral counts,” he said.

As it stands now, a counter 10-day plan has been tabled by the Opposition-nominated commissioners and, along with earlier proposals made by the government-nominated commissioners, Lowenfield is to redraft the plan.

The Commission agreed to have that ‘two Commissioners per station’ restriction removed, paving the way for the number of workstations to be increased. However, the duration of the recount will be influenced by a number of other factors, including the time taken to count the ballots in the boxes.