Guyana’s Ambassador to the European Union, Sasenarine Singh, who was a People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) agent during the 2020 Elections, today told the Court that he was not present when the then Region 4 Returning Officer, Clairmont Mingo, reportedly made the first declaration of election results for Region 4. He also testified that he could not recall the second declaration being made.

Singh made the disclosure as he was being cross-examined by Defense Attorney Nigel Hughes as the Election Fraud Case resumed in the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court today before Chief Magistrate (ag) Faith Mc Gusty.

 Mingo is among nine persons facing a total of 28 charges of attempting to commit fraud at the 2020 General and Regional Elections.

In his earlier testimony, Singh told the Court that Mingo had announced his intention to declare the results of the votes cast in District 4, and proceeded to do so at the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Command Centre in the Ashmin’s Building, although, the tabulation process was incomplete.

But as he was questioned by Hughes, Singh told the Court that he was not in the room when Mingo reportedly made the first declaration nor could he recall the second declaration.

“I was not in the room,” he told the Court, adding that he was not in a position to hear.

Hughes then suggested to Singh that based on his own knowledge, he was unaware whether or not a declaration had been made by Mingo.

“So, you don’t know whether a declaration was made or not by Mr. Mingo?” Hughes asked.

Dodging the question, Singh attempted to direct the Court’s attention to publications made by the press, but Hughes redirected him to the question.

“I was not present in the room,” Singh repeated.

Against that background, Hughes suggested to Singh that the evidence he provided to Court earlier that Mingo had declared the results of the election was “mischaracterized.”

“Do you accept since you were not there, and you didn’t have the opportunity to hear, you cannot characterize what he said? You can’t even say whether Mingo spoke at all,” Hughes submitted.

Singh responded in the affirmative, admitting that he could not say, however, he rejected Hughes’ assertion that his evidence against Mingo was “mischaracterized.”

As Hughes continued to press Singh, Special Prosecutor, Darshan Ramdhani stood in objection, telling the Court that Hughes’ line of questioning was “unfair.”

During the course of Singh’s testimony, the Court heard that he was stationed at the Hope Secondary School during the elections, where he received a copy of a Statement of Poll (SOP) from the Presiding Officer at the close of poll. That SOP was taken, according to Singh to Freedom House.

But as he was grilled by Hughes, Singh could not remember key details about the SOP, and the full name of the person, who he had given it to at Freedom House.

“It was a carbon copy,” he told the Court, adding that he had not seen the original SOP.

It was then that Hughes questioned whether it was possible that the content of the SOP could have been altered between the time it was received, and the time it was delivered to Freedom House.

“Do you accept that when you had the Statement of Poll in your possession, you had the opportunity to change the content? Not saying you did, but you had the opportunity to change the content of the document in your possession,” Hughes questioned.

“How so because we were against time,” Singh responded

But again as Hughes continued to press him for answers, Ramdhani objected, telling the Court that Hughes’ line of questioning was “scandalous.” Ramdhani said the questions lacked foundation and were speculative and unfair.

Hughes, however, told the Court that the questions were relevant, and that he had a duty to defend his clients.

“I have a responsibility to the defendants whose lives are on the line to examine the case that the prosecution is presenting. They are accused of committing fraud, they are accused of conspiring; he has a document in his possession, why I can’t ask him?” Hughes told the Court.

Singh, in the end, did not answer the question.

Meanwhile, while being led by State Prosecutor Madana Rampersaud, Singh “walked” the Court through a number of video recordings that he had taken during the events that unfolded at the Ashmin’s Building during the course of the election.

In those recordings, he identified a number of individuals including agents from a number of political parties, and local and international observers.

The case against Mingo and the eight other accused – former Chief Elections Officer, Keith Lowenfield; the former Deputy Chief Elections Officer, Roxanne Myers; former Minister of Health, Volda Lawrence; People’s National Congress Reform (PNC/R) Member Carol Smith-Joseph; and ex-Election Officers Sheffern February, Enrique Livan, Denise Bobb-Cummings and Michelle Miller, will continue on Friday.

The accused have all maintained their innocence.

Related posts:

Shuman testifies to objecting to various discrepancies during 2020 Election Controversy TCI 2020 Presidential Candidate testifies of widespread discrepancies as 2020 Election Fraud case resumes ANUG’s Kian Jabour testifies of breaching barriers and kicking down of GECOM Chairman’s door during Election chaos Local Government Minister testifies about inflated spreadsheet numbers being announced during Election tabulation