-testifies about white bedsheet
Former Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Commissioner Robeson Benn yesterday acknowledged that he did not personally see former Chief Election Officer Keith Lowenfield alter Statements of Poll (SOPs), change spreadsheets or enter figures into election documents, but maintained that he witnessed discrepancies during the disputed tabulation of the March 2020 election results.
The statements came during continued cross-examination by defence attorney Dexter Todd in the 2020 elections trial before Magistrate Faith McGusty.
Todd questioned the former Home Affairs Minister about the basis of his evidence against Lowenfield, his verification of figures challenged by political party representatives, and his account of the breakdown of the District Four tabulation.
“I did not see Mr. Lowenfield altering SOP,” Benn told the court.
He also acknowledged that he had not seen Lowenfield alter a spreadsheet or enter figures into a relevant document.
“I did not hear him instruct anyone to enter any figure in any document,” Benn further testified.
When Todd put to him that he could not personally identify a particular false entry made by Lowenfield, Benn referred instead to an election results declaration which he said Lowenfield had made and signed.
The defence attorney subsequently challenged whether Benn had independently checked disputed figures against the election documents held by GECOM, rather than relying on information supplied by political parties.
Benn maintained that his knowledge came both from complaints made by party agents and his own observations during tabulation at the Ashmins building.
He said he stood behind party representatives, looked at the figures projected on a screen and examined the records they were using to challenge those figures.
According to Benn, representatives of the PPP/C, ANUG and other parties raised objections. He said APNU+AFC representatives did not raise similar objections and appeared unwilling to engage.
Todd suggested that Benn’s approach had not been fair and balanced, questioning why he had not also examined APNU+AFC’s records before forming an opinion.
Benn maintained that the objections had a genuine basis and that checks confirmed the discrepancies.
Asked whether differences in tabulation could have resulted from mistakes, Benn described what occurred as “gross errors and fabrications.”
“The fabrication is a better word,” he added.
He acknowledged, however, that he had not personally made notes of the alleged fabrications.
A substantial portion of the cross-examination focused on a later tabulation exercise in GECOM’s compound, where Benn said figures were projected onto a white bedsheet that moved in the breeze, preventing those present from properly following the presentation.
“The basis of the objection is that the numbers being projected were not clear,” Benn testified.
Todd sought to distinguish that complaint from evidence that the figures themselves were inaccurate, putting to Benn that an inability to see the projection left him unable to confirm whether the numbers were wrong.
Benn maintained that the exercise did not allow party representatives and observers to verify the figures against their records. He said he stood and objected as a commissioner, but the proceedings descended into disorder.
“The entire election tabulation process collapsed there and then with events in the yard,” he told the court.
Benn also alleged that APNU+AFC representative Carol Smith-Joseph threatened people and played a principal role in the disorder. Those allegations were challenged by Todd, who questioned whether Benn had made a police report or previously given evidence in court about the alleged threats.
On the preparation of the disputed spreadsheets, Benn said he was not aware of the particular persons responsible. He also said he was unaware of Smith-Joseph preparing a spreadsheet or participating in its preparation.
Todd further questioned Benn about alleged irregularities during the national recount, including claims of voter impersonation and missing statutory documents.
Benn said he was unaware of several of the specific allegations put to him. He acknowledged concerns about documents associated with some East Coast ballot boxes, but maintained that those matters had been resolved during the recount.
“All the issues in relation to the elections were resolved at the recount without contradiction,” he testified.
The court also heard exchanges about the introduction of recount figures. After the prosecution indicated that it intended to lead evidence on those numbers, Todd said he would seek to recall Benn once the relevant figures had been tendered.
Todd again pressed Benn on whether his verification should have relied on GECOM’s records.
Benn responded that his sources were not necessarily confined to the commission, which he said had become dysfunctional and fallen into disarray.
Discussion