Day two of the 2020 General and Regional Elections fraud case saw the testimonies of two of the prosecution’s witnesses being presented, including one, Local Government Minister Sonia Parag, detailing how the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) defied protests from observers and party reps, as well as a court order to call out fictitious results.
The trial continued on Tuesday before Senior Magistrate Leron Daly. Parag, who at the time of the elections was a People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) candidate and party representative, related to the court her experience at Ashmins’ Building and then GECOM’s office on High Street, where the infamous bedsheet tabulation took place.
Parag testified that despite a Court Order from acting Chief Justice Roxanne George, which compelled GECOM to use only the Statements of Poll (SOPs) to tabulate the numbers for the Region Four (Demerara/Mahaica) votes, Returning Officer Clairmont Mingo, one of those now on trial, continued to conduct the tabulation using a projector and bedsheet.
She further testified that both she and the European Union (EU) observer, protested that they could not see the numbers being projected on the bedsheet, to compare with their own numbers. However, their objections were ignored and GECOM pushed on until Mingo made his now infamous final declaration.
Both Parag and the prosecution’s second witness, Head of the Diaspora Unit Rosalinda Rasul, testified that GECOM staff consistently ignored objections from party reps and observers when they called out results that did not match the SOPs in their possession.
But the day’s proceedings were also marred by multiple objections from the defence counsel, over various perceived breaches of court procedures.
For instance, the defence objected to Parag’s testimony naming APNU politicians such as Volda Lawrence, who she said remained silent when PPP/C and other parties were objecting to discrepancies in the results being called out by GECOM.
They also objected to her identifying then APNU rep James Bond, who was sitting in the tabulation center. In the case of Bond, the defence pointed out that Bond was not present in court to defend himself.
At one point, Special Prosecutor Darshan Ramdhani objected to the defence’s string of objections, even describing them as interfering with the proceedings. But when Rasul was called as the next witness, the deluge of objections continued.
For instance, the defence objected to any testimony from Rasul that they claimed drew conclusions or opinions. Attorney-at-Law Eusi Anderson even raised objections to evidence about conspiracy, with Magistrate Daly informing him she would determine how to treat this.
In an interview with reporters outside the courtroom, Ramdhani described the defence’s objections as an effort to further prolong the trial.
He noted that instead of having four witnesses take the stand, only two witnesses have been afforded that opportunity.
“We find what is happening, this continuous standing up unnecessarily is continuing to prolong this matter. We could have completed this witness already. We had four witnesses yesterday lined up, we had four separate witnesses today lined up and we are still just in the evidence in chief of one witness. Now, persons are sitting in court and they see what is going on,”
“I will continue to press the court that this evidence is relevant, this evidence should be admitted and we should be allowed to present this case. This is where we are…And I am very concerned that if a witness is not allowed to say who she saw present when she has put that name in the statement given to the police, when this witness is not permitted to say when she said witnesses are objecting and to say what words are used in an objection. I am concerned,” he added.
However, Anderson had no apologies to make when he spoke to reporters after the adjournment. According to him, the defense’s point of contention remains that the witness cannot be allowed to testify to things that were not previously disclosed to the defense.
“What we have found is a lot of what is contained in the disclosed statements to us is not what the witness is referring to in her evidence in the witness box, and that continues to be an issue, it continues to be an issue of fairness, it continues to be an issue of ambush.”
“And we are deeply concerned about how it would affect the integrity of the proceedings going forward. That being said, we are confident that the court continues to do its very best to mitigate those risks and balance the situation as much as possible,” Anderson said.
The case was meanwhile adjourned to today at 9:30 hours, where testimony is expected to continue. The trial is set to last from July 29 to September 13, some four years after the 2020 General and Regional Elections.
In addition to Mingo, former Chief Elections Officer (CEO) Keith Lowenfield, his former Deputy Roxanne Myers, former People’s National Congress/Reform (PNCR) Chairperson Volda Lawrence, PNCR activist Carol Smith-Joseph, and GECOM employees Sheffern February, Enrique Livan, Denise Babb-Cummings and Michelle Miller, are facing twenty-eight charges relating to electoral fraud.
