During the election fraud trial, Minister Sonia Parag testified about discrepancies between spreadsheet totals and Statements of Poll during the 2020 elections. Her account highlights concerns over potential manipulation that favored the APNU+AFC coalition, alongside significant procedural issues and the involvement of key election officials. The trial moves onto its next witness amidst ongoing controversies.
In a significant development in the ongoing election fraud trial, Minister of Local Government Sonia Parag took the witness stand, confirming discrepancies between spreadsheet data and Statements of Poll (SOPs) during the 2020 General and Regional Elections. Her testimony before Acting Chief Magistrate Faith McGusty detailed her experiences as a polling agent for the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C), particularly focusing on her observations at the Region Four Command Centre on March 4, 2020.
Parag recounted the chaotic scene in which Election Officer Michelle Miller presented vote totals that did not align with the SOPs she had. “From Box 4001, the number that Miss Michelle Miller called, I compared it with the number that I had… and it did not match,” she stated, emphasizing her confusion and concern as she repeatedly asked Miller to verify the figures. According to her account, the inaccuracies seemed to consistently favor the then-ruling coalition, APNU+AFC. “The numbers that were being called by Michelle Miller were actually adding votes for the APNU+AFC and deducting votes for the PPP,” Parag added.
Throughout this process, she asserted that she objected to every vote box being counted from 4001 to 4021, stressing discrepancies she noted. Parag’s objections were supported by fellow PPP/C agent Kwame McCoy, who was also present. Amid rising tensions, a party agent requested that SOPs be prioritized over the questioned spreadsheet data.
The situation escalated when then-Chief Election Officer Keith Lowenfield was brought in to address the irregularities. Parag described how Lowenfield dismissed her claims, stating that the spreadsheet figures matched the SOPs—a claim she refuted. “It was only after President of the Guyana Bar Association, Teni Housty, intervened and quoted electoral laws that Lowenfield instructed that SOPs be brought in for use,” she recounted. When the SOPs were finally utilized, the figures aligned correctly, yet the pace of the tabulation slowed significantly as Election Officer Miller reported fatigue, halting the process entirely.
Following this, the next day on March 5, as the tabulation was meant to resume, Parag noted that Deputy Chief Election Officer Roxanne Myers ordered the evacuation of the tabulation center due to a supposed bomb threat. Despite the chaos, Parag dismissed the bomb scare as unfounded, indicating her desire to remain involved in the process.
As tensions mounted, Region Four Returning Officer Clairmont Mingo reappeared and attempted to declare election results prematurely. Parag vividly described the reaction in the room, stating, “the entire room including myself jumped up and objected,” highlighting the seriousness of the ongoing tabulation process. Parag firmly maintained that the declaration should not have occurred as the tabulation was still incomplete.
Meanwhile, AMCHAM observer Rosalinda Rasul wrapped up her testimony after multiple days of questioning. In today’s proceedings, the prosecution is set to call Kian Jabour as their next witness. The trial itself involves several key figures including Lowenfield, Myers, and Mingo, who all face charges related to the alleged manipulation of election results in Guyana’s contentious 2020 elections. Delays have plagued the case, beginning anew under Magistrate McGusty after the previous magistrate fell ill.
Today’s testimony from Minister Sonia Parag underscores serious concerns over the integrity of vote counting during the 2020 Elections in Guyana. Her accounts of discrepancies between spreadsheet figures and the official SOPs build a narrative of potential election fraud that involved key officials. With the ongoing trial revealing significant procedural flaws, the implications for the accused and electoral integrity in Guyana remain to be seen as the case continues.
Original Source: www.stabroeknews.com
