By Jolly Green

When
Ralph Gonsalves told the electorate something, commenting after the
failed referendum pole 2009, he made it very obvious that he was
aware that bribing the electorate at the time of elections is the
only sure way to get elected. A criminal act, both for the briber and
the bribed. You can be sure he already knew that for years because he
claims to be a lawyer with constitutional expertise. He is an expert
in law and a political scientist.

So
what was the difference between bribing the people at the time of an
election which there is plenty of evidence that has been done before
every election since at least 2006? What is the difference between
that and bribing the electorate at the time of a Constitutional
Referendum, whereby none of the electorates were [known to be]
bribed? The referendum was held to rid us of the Queen as Head of
State and replace her with a Republic system with a President as Head
of State. Had the electorate been bribed at that time the British
government and the Commonwealth would have reacted in such a way that
Gonsalves may well have found himself held on bribery charges. So
unlike the general election, there were no building materials
distributed as bribes before the constitutional referendum in 2009.
Had it of passed Gonsalves would most likely be president right now.

When
the police are told or know about a chargeable offense and do nothing
about, that is a criminal act on the part of the individual police
force members. When the Police chief and commanding officers know of
the bribery campaign and do nothing to stop it that is at the very
least police misconduct, and may be chargeable offenses are
committed.

When
a man walks down the road with knapsack or bag, or goes to the ferry
port and is searched, or a ladies shopping bags are rifled with no
previous information laid before the police, that is a fishing trip.

When
a thousand small and medium trucks loaded with building materials
drive past the police station for days and weeks before an election
and the police act as if nothing is happening. That is at the least
dereliction of duty perhaps an illegal act by the police. The police
like everyone else know what these trucks are carrying and for what
purpose. Some of those trucks will perhaps even be going to the homes
of police officers.

When
the police and even the police chief knows that truckloads of
building materials are being delivered to private homes as gifts to
encourage the recipient to vote for a particular political party,
failing to act on that knowledge is a criminal act on behalf of the
police. The police even helped direct traffic when the roads are
jammed outside the store yards. They aid and abet the flow of stolen
property to the bribed electorate.

The
St. Vincent and the Grenadines: Electoral Law; Representation of the
People Act PART V1 Election Offences, is very clear on the matter.

44.
44. (1) The following persons shall be deemed guilty of bribery
within the meaning of this Act-.

1. 
   any
   person who, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other
   person on his behalf, gives, ]ends, agrees to give or lend, or
   offers, promises to procure or to endeavour to procure, any money or
   valuable consideration to or for any voter, or to or for any other
   person in order to induce any voter to vote or refrain from voting,
   or corruptly does any such act as aforesaid on account of any voter
   having voted or refrained from voting at any election;
   
2. 
   any
   person who, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other
   person on his behalf, gives or procures, or agrees to give or
   procure, or offers, promises, or promises to procure or to endeavour
   to procure, any office, place or employment to or for any voter, or
   to or for any person on behalf of any voter or to or for any other
   person in order to induce such voter to vote or refrain from- voting
   or corruptly does any voting, or corruptly does any such act as
   aforesaid on account of Wany voter having voted or refrained from
   voting at any election;
   
3. 
   any
   person who, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other
   person on his behalf, makes any such gift, loan, offer, promise,
   procurement, or agreement as aforesaid to or for any person, in
   order to induce such person to procure, or endeavor to procure, the
   return of any person as an elected member of the House of Assembly,
   or the vote of any voter at any election;
   
4. 
   any
   person who, upon or in consequence of any such gift, loan, offer,
   promise, procurement or agreement, procures or engages, promises or
   endeavors to procure, the return of any person as an elected member
   of the House of Assembly or the vote of any voter at any election;
   
5. 
   any
   person who advances or pays, or causes to be paid, any money to or
   to the use of any other person with the intent that such money, or
   any part thereof, shall be expended in bribery at any election or
   who knowingly pays or causes to be paid any money to any person in
   discharge of repayment of any money wholly or in part expended in
   bribery at any such election;
   
6. 
   any
   voter who, before or during any election, directly or indirectly, by
   himself or by any other person on his behalf, receives, agrees or
   contracts for any money, gift, loan or valuable consideration,
   office, place or employment for himself or for any other person, for
   voting or agreeing to vote, or for refraining or agreeing to refrain
   from voting at any election; and
   
7. 
   any
   person who, after any election, directly or indirectly, by himself
   or by any other person on his behalf, receives any money or valuable
   consideration on account of any person having induced any other
   person to vote or refrain from voting at any such election.
   

(2)
The provisions of subsection (1) shall not extend or be construed to
extend to any money paid or agreed to be paid for or on account of
any legal expenses incurred in good faith at, or concerning, an
election.

(3)
For the purposes of subsection (2), "legal expenses"
include

1. 
   the
   payment of the agents, clerks, canvassers, and messengers of
   candidates;
   
2. 
   payments
   made for the purpose of hiring vehicles for the conveyance of voters
   to or from a polling station;
   
3. 
   payments
   made for the use of any premises for a public meeting in furtherance
   of the candidature of any person or for the use of any committee
   room or office for the purpose of promoting or procuring the
   election of a candidate;
   
4. 
   payments
   made in respect of postage, stationery, printing, advertising, the
   distribution of advertising materials and the use of any public
   address system.
   

45.
The following persons shall be deemed guilty of treating within the
meaning of this Act-

1. 
   every
   person who corruptly, by himself or by any other person, either
   before, during or after an election, directly or indirectly, gives,
   or Provides or pays wholly or in part the expenses of giving or
   providing any food, drink, entertainment, or provision to or for any
   person for the purpose of corruptly influencing that person, or any
   other person, to vote, or to refrain from voting, at such election,
   or on account of such person or any other person having voted or
   refrained from voting at such election;
   
2. 
   every
   person who corruptly accepts or takes any such food, drink,
   entertainment or provision.
   

46.
Any person who, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other
person on his behalf, makes use of, or threatens to make use of, any
force, violence, or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict by
'himself or by any other person any temporal or spiritual injury,
damage, harm, or loss upon or against any person, in order to induce
or compel such person to vote or refrain from voting or an account of
such person having voted or refrained from voting at any election, or
who by abduction, duress, or any fraudulent contrivance, impedes or
prevents the free exercise of the franchise of any voter, or thereby
compels, induces, or prevails upon any voter either to give or
refrain from giving his vote at any election, shall be guilty of
undue influence within the meaning of this Act.

47.
Any person who at an election applies for a ballot paper in the name
of another person, whether that name be the name of a person living
or dead or of a fictitious person, or who, having once voted at any
election, applies at the same election for a ballot paper in his own
name, shall be guilty of personation within the meaning of this Act.

48.
Any person who is guilty of bribery, treating or undue influence
under the provisions of this Act, is liable to a fine of seven
hundred and fifty dollars and to imprisonment for six months.

49.
Any person who is guilty of personation, or of aiding, abetting,
counselling or procuring the commission of the offence of
personation, is liable, on conviction on indictment, to a fine of
four thousand dollars and to imprisonment for two years.

50.
Any person who is convicted of bribery, treating, undue influence or
personating or of aiding, counseling, or procuring the commission of
49 the offense of personation shall (in addition to any other
punishment) be incapable during a period of seven years from the date
of conviction –

There
are many more rules for you the citizen to study so look online at

http://pdba.georgetown.edu/Electoral/StVincent/StV&Gr.html

Before
each of the last three elections, thousands of citizens received
building materials either owned by the Government of Saint Vincent
and the Grenadines or the Unity Labour Party. The materials were
distributed only to known Unity Labour Party supporters. Some members
of the government tried to create a sham reason for the distribution
by saying the materials were for the repair of previous storm damage.
But materials were given to people who obviously did not even need
such materials and the goods ended up stored at dwelling for months
after the elections.

This
must never happen again. If the police do not act to stop this
happening they should be filmed, and foreign TV companies should be
invited to carry the story. Every truck carrying bribery building
materials in the future should be filmed, the recipients should be
filmed, the goods being unloaded should be filmed. Footage should be
sent to every news agency worldwide.

Constituency
offices where it was observed last time order sheets of confirmed
amounts were given out to citizens to be able to collect government
and ULP owned building materials should be filmed.

This
kind of bribery should never be tolerated again, tell the authorities
they are being filmed and recorded. The NDP should employ people to
film bribery and publish it on YouTube.

Be
prepared to ask the British and US government for help with the
matter, ask them months and weeks before an election to comment on
previous and present elections. Ask observers to make reports
specifically on these matters weeks prior to the Election Day; when
most of this bribery is going on.

It
has to stop and the police should stop protecting the government and
protect the people from this dastardly corruption.

The
police have become a private police force owned by the ULP, the Prime
Minister and his family Dynasty. Almost anything and everything that
has political under or overtones must be passed by Ralph Gonsalves
for approval.

Police
misconduct under the ULP is out of control of public oversight but
under the control of the ULP leadership. Misconduct refers to
inappropriate conduct and or illegal actions taken by police officers
in connection with their official duties. Police misconduct can lead
to a miscarriage of justice and sometimes involves discrimination and
or illegal motives of segregation combined as obstruction of justice.
There is no civilian input of the police anymore. The police have
become politically jaundiced carrying out precise political orders,
some times with mal effect on citizens

Individuals
and groups should now be filming police at every opportunity, in an
effort to force police to become accountable for their actions and
for their inactions. With the proliferation of mobile devices capable
of recording alleged misconduct, police misconduct and abuse should
now be receiving publicity on social media and on websites including
YouTube. Police often try to intimidate citizens to prevent them from
using cameras. In other circumstances, police will illegally seize or
delete evidence recorded by citizens, notwithstanding laws that make
it a crime to destroy evidence of a crime being committed,
irrespective of whether the crime is committed by civilians or by the
police.

Types
of misconduct include coerced false confession, beating of
interviewees in the interview room, intimidation, false arrest,
false imprisonment, falsification of evidence, planting evidence,
spoliation of evidence, invention of charges previously unknown,
police perjury, witness tampering, police brutality, police
corruption, unwarranted surveillance, unwarranted searches, and
unwarranted seizure of property.

Police
making selective enforcement, sexual misconduct by police officers,
off-duty misconduct, killing of dogs unjustly. Noble cause
corruption, where the officer believes the good outcomes justify bad
behaviour. Using badge or other ID to gain entry into concerts, to
get free food and drinks in restaurants and bars, to get discounts,
etc. Influence of drugs or alcohol while on duty. Violations by
officers of police procedural policies. Police officers often share
a "blue code of silence", which means that they do not turn
each other in for misconduct. While some officers have called this
code a myth.

We
must be sure that the rape of our voting system stops and that
elections are free and fair without bribery. I am calling for
everyone to film everything that they think is untoward. You can if
you wish forward it to me and I will see it is properly archived or
used against perpetrators, sent on to overseas government agencies.

Jolly Green, jollygreenandall@gmail.com

END

DISCLAMER: The opinion, belief and viewpoint expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect the opinion, belief and viewpoint of iNews Cayman/ieyenews.com or official policies of iNews Cayman/ieyenews.com