Trial finally begins into attempts to rig 2020 elections

By Sharda Bacchus

Shardabacchus@newsroom.gy

Minister of Local Government and Regional Development Sonia Parag was the first witness to take the stand on Monday morning when the long-delayed trial into attempts to rig the 2020 General and Regional elections commenced.

Senior officials of the country’s elections body GECOM colluded with senior officials of the then governing APNU+AFC Coalition in the attempt to rig the elections, causing the process to be dragged out for five months.

The trial is being held at the Georgetown Magistrate’s court before Senior Magistrate Leron Daly.

Nine persons are before the court in relation to electoral fraud. They are: former APNU+AFC government minister Volda Lawrence; former GECOM Chief Elections Officer Keith Lowenfield; former GECOM Returning Officer for District Four Clairmont Mingo; former GECOM Deputy Chief Election Officer Roxanne Myers; APNU+AFC’s Chief Scrutineer Carol Smith Joseph; and former GECOM employees Sheffern February, Enrique Liven, Michelle Miller and Denise Babb-Cummings.

All of them were present in court except Miller, who the court heard is currently overseas visiting her mother who is ill.

They face 9 conspiracy charges which are said to have been committed between elections day – March 2, 2020 – to August 2, 2020.

It is alleged that the defendants conspired during the 2020 General and Regional elections to defraud the electors of Guyana by declaring a false account of votes cast.

In his opening address to the court, attorney Darshan Ramdhani, who is leading the case outlined that during the trial, which is expected to run for six weeks, numerous witnesses will give evidence.

He said among several things, the witnesses will detail the events which took place during the 2020 elections, particularly as it relates to the tabulation and verification of votes, which were subject to a series of irregularities.

The witnesses, Ramdhani said, will delve into details about how the figures on the Statement of Polls were allegedly altered to add votes for APNU+AFC and decrease votes for the then opposition PPP/C.

Additionally, the prosecutor told the court that evidence will also be given in relation to a false declaration made by Mingo and the roles the other defendants, including the former GECOM staff, played in aiding the attempt to rig the elections.

The defendants’ lawyers include attorneys Eusi Anderson, Darren Wade and Ronald Daniels.

After listening to the prosecution summary of the case, Anderson made three applications to the court.

The first was for the provisions of Statement of Polls (SOPs), which he said seems to be the heart of the case. This application was granted.

The second application from Anderson was a request for protection of all of the defendants to prevent them from being intimidated during the trial. However, this application was not granted by the magistrate, who told Anderson, she is not aware who such request has to be made to.

Anderson in his third application asked the court to facilitate a visit to the Ashmins building where all the events unfolded. This, he said is a fundamental aspect of the trial so that the defence and the court in general can have an understanding of evidence presented by the witnessed during the trial.

A determination of this application, the magistrate, said will be made during the trial.

Parag, who was a practicing attorney and candidate of polls for the PPP/C during the 2020 elections, detailed the roles played by some of the defandants in the case during her testimony. She also identified them in court.

Parag said she was tasked with comparing the figures from the SOPs when the process was halted.

In her testimony, Parag detailed to the court that the tabulation of votes commenced on March 3, 2020 at approximately 08:00hrs. So she said she ventured to Ashmin’s building to observe the process on behalf of the PPP/C.

Upon arrival, Parag said she entered a room in the bottom flat of the building. There were several persons in that room, including party representative as well and local and international observers.

The process, Parag explained, was being conducted by comparing numbers of the SOPs to those being called out by Returning Officer Mingo.

The process she said continued throughout the day and went into the night. However, around 21:00 hrs, she recalled that Mingo related that he was tired and the process would have to continue the following morning. As such the tabulation exercise was suspended and Parag said she subsequently left the building.

Upon her return the following morning, she said the process did not continue, and upon enquiring she heard “something had happened”.

That was when Mingo complained for feeling ill and had to be taken away by an ambulance. Though there was a commotion, she remained in the room to guard the SOPs.

Subsequently, Parag told the court that two GECOM employees were present in the tabulation room. The tabulation process, she said, continued in the presence of Lawrence and another female.

During this, Parag told the court that Miller was holding a “document” and she began to call out numbers which she said was from box number 4001 from East Bank of Demerara.

Parag’s evidence was interrupted on several occasions, based on questions raised by defence attorneys, who mainly had issues with identification, particularly of the defendants.

But in response to this, the magistrate informed the court that the case of identification in this particular case does not bear any merit.

Following the lunch break, the trial continued on Monday afternoon when Parag was expected to continue her testimony.

Advertisement

_____