Advertisement 87
Advertisement 211
Advertisement 219

Activist Luzette King says that stealing an election is more like fixing a deck of cards than robbing a bank, and the first is what happened in the Dec. 9 general elections.

King has emerged as the de facto leader of protesters who have gathered outside or near the Electoral Office in Kingstown since the Dec. 9 vote.

Electoral officials have declared the elections won by the Unity Labour Party (ULP), which has been returned to office for a fourth consecutive term.

Luzette King. (IWN file photo)
Luzette King. (IWN file photo)

They say that the ULP won eight of the 15 parliamentary seats, while the remaining seven went to the main opposition New Democratic Party (NDP), a repeat of the 2010 election results.

But King told the media this week that the protesters believe the elections were stolen and this resulted in the 8-7 results against the NDP.

Advertisement 21

“Therefore, we contend that the people of St. Vincent and the Grenadines have been denied the chance of a fresh start with the Hon. Arnhim Eustace as prime minister. Instead, the nation is burdened with an illegal Unity Labour Party government,” said King, who is based in the United States.

“There is no doubt that elections can be stolen,” King said, adding: “Stealing an election is not the same as robbing a bank.

“A sitting government can use its position of authority to influence the outcome of an election before, during and after polling day and this is what happened while the unity labour party was in government.”

She said the best evidence is “to catch a candidate with boxes of unopened ballots, etc.

“Stealing an election is more like fixing a deck of cards, where one player is guaranteed to come out on top,” she said.

“As we have just seen here in SVG on Dec. 9th, 2015, the result of a fraudulent election can appear to be the same as one that is free and fair.

“So how can we tell that the will of the people is not reflected in the results of Dec. 9th, 2015 here in SVG? Why are we not going to allow a stolen election to be called legitimate?

“The ULP cannot prove to Vincentians and the world, beyond any doubt, that they did not steal the elections,” she said and went on to list untoward practised that she said the ULP was involved in, including the misinformation; misleading or confusing ballot papers and division of opposition support.

“We all know, too, that hundreds of people in need of supplies to build or repair their homes did not get any of the supplies, while known ULP supporters, including some head teachers and teachers and other working class people who are die hard ULP got enough supplies to build large homes.

“Many of those people still have the supplies covered up and unused while others have been selling them to other people.”

King said that since the election there has been “a heightening of police brutality and the consequent denial of democratic rights and freedoms of many Vincentians who have gathered to protest peacefully.

“We have seen the arrest of Douglas De Dreitas, Shabaaz and Ben Exeter and myself. Interestingly, Ben Exeter contended these elections as an NDP candidate in the Central Leeward constituency and is currently challenging in court the results of those elections.”

King was arrested on Jan. 6 and charged with being a public inconvenience as a result of developments a police attempted to remove protesters from in front the Electoral Office.

Another opposition personality arrested in St. Vincent

“In fact, we also note what seems to be subliminal messages to the court and in this instance, the judgment denying the NDP access to inspect the ballot papers reflect in statements made on air. For example, the reference to ‘fishing expedition’ in the judgment is quite similar to that unity labour party suggestions,” King said in reference to a High Court judgement denying Exeter access to certain election-related documents.

“Further, there have been references made to the Public Order Act when discussing activities as they relate to our protesting these elections and other matters arising from them. This act does not apply to cases to Vincentians are demonstrating peacefully. In fact, this is an attempt to supersede Constitution!” King said.

She noted that the Constitution of St. Vincent and the Grenadines provides for the protection of freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and association and freedom of movement, adding that these same rights are also imbedded in the United Nations Charter of Human Rights.

“For our nation to move forward into 2016 and beyond, we cannot continue to allow any government to buy us out and when they can’t they resort to undermining our basic human rights as mentioned before.

“It is a most dangerous sign when a government has had to engage in wide scale corruption to win an election. The country’s resources belong to all nationals,” King said.

12 replies on “ULP cannot prove it didn’t steal the elections — activist”

  1. This lady is talking rubbish. up to now we cant have proof that ULP stole the election?

    Hey Luzette, was there missing ballot boxes? Im trying to understand what you guys are really saying. Where is this proof?

    You mean all the imported lawyers were there and none of them could have seen when the election was being stolen?

    You know what, let me stop wasting my precious time listening to Luzette and the NDP. Ah gone

  2. When Ms. King says, “The ULP cannot prove to Vincentians and the world, beyond any doubt, that they did not steal the elections,” she utters logical, substantive and legal nonsense:

    1. In logical and legal terms the burden lies with Ms. King to provide the evidence that the ULP stole the election: When one party asserts a claim (election theft) that the other disputes (the ULP’s claim of free and fair elections), the party who asserts the first claim has a burden of proof to justify or substantiate that claim. An “argument from ignorance” occurs when either an assertion is assumed to be true because it has not yet been proved false or a proposition is assumed to be false because it has not yet been proved true. Ms. King is guilty of argument from ignorance.

    2. Where is Ms. King’s evidence that the election was stolen? Where, for example, are the photos of the trucks lined up day and night at the Arnos Vale depot to take material to persons homes?

    3. Where is the evidence, photos and sworn testimony, from persons who received this material from the ULP in exchange for their vote? And don’t tell me that among the thousands who are alleged to have received this material up to the eve of the election, not a single one is willing to testify that they sold their vote for a few sheets of galvanize.

    4. Where is the evidence for voter and ballot fraud on election day? The proof that there was no fraud is the testimony of all those involved in the election process and all those who impartial external bodies that said the election was free and fair.

    1. As for Ms. King’s reference to “beyond any doubt,” the term has no legal standing in SVG or any other jurisdiction I am aware of: in criminal matters, we use the term “beyond a reasonable doubt” to convict people; in civil law, the standard is “a balance of probabilities.”

      Using “beyond any doubt” as a criterion would be like asking an atheist to disprove the existence of God on these grounds, which would be as impossible as asking a Christian to prove beyond any doubt that Jesus was the son of God.

      All this goes to show is these people have neither logic, the law, or evidence on their side, only raw emotion and a hunger for power and glory.

      Addendum: in the first post I should have said “not even a dozen people” instead of “not a single one” since I understand that a sole person made this claim.

  3. The burden of proof is on the NDP not on the government. But time will tell, the court will make a ruling.

    The best outcome in a court ruling for the sake of peace in the country, is to have fresh election in Central Leeward. And whatever the results, all parties agree to abide by the results.

    1. No court will rule for new elections based on the inconsequential and inconclusive evidence presented by the NDP.

      If there was carefully crafted electoral theft, it would have been even more so carefully concealed so that no evidence for the theft would ever be discovered.

      On the other hand, if there were simply a few unintentional electoral errors and oversights, the courts would never view these as sufficient to overturn an election.

      Trying to use the courts to mask their own failings to gain more votes is just another reason to doubt the ability of the NDP to rule Hairoona.

      If the ULP “stole” Central Leeward and North Windward, why didn’t they also steal at least one more seat like North Leeward where they barely lost so as to increase their margin of victory? After all, trying to steal an election by a mere one-seat majority is pretty risky business.

    2. Hell no! I disagree.
      If we have any fresh election and ULP won again, who is going to guarantee that NDP’ites will accept the outcome… YOU?
      Cry of the ignorant… “DEM THIEF AGAIN”!
      I say “a win is a win”. ULP won and we move on! Who vex, vex!
      As Chucky the doll says…”WANNA PLAY”?
      See you in court!

      1. I agree with both sentiments expressed by vinciman and C.ben-David. It’s a very long shot for the courts to overturn an election results; but merely expressing a desire to get some political stability in the country.

        I suspect, if the courts were to overturn the results in Central Leeward, the ulp will win a new election; thereby putting the NDP out of their misery.

        @vinciman, I can guarantee one thing… You are a RED RAT…LOL.

      2. Why are you sooo afraid of a new election in those constituencies? If there is a new vote and the NDP looses again that will DESTROY the reputation of the NDP! Otherwise we will be ruled by Eustace who is obviously far better than our corrupt monster, Ralph.
        I guess I too would be afraid if I knew in my heart that the present leader is just a thief in chief.

  4. Any person who expressed the desire that she wished that a Tsunami could come and destroy
    the Argyle Airport , is mentally impaired , and that is putting it mildly . She slumped to the ground in the middle of the Street , and refused to move . Once again proving that she is
    mentally impaired .

    Now if Ms. King continues to behave in this manner , it is quite possible that she has invested
    in the NDP , much more than her time & effort to ensure that the NDP won the November 9th
    General Elections , and is exceedingly disappointed by the outcome of the General Elections .

    It is also quite possible that others also invested more than their Time & Effort , and that is at
    the heart of this Protest Movement , they all apparently have reaped a very Bitter Harvest . So
    Disappointment & Despair , has now turned to Angry & Bellicose Protest . I sincerely hope
    that if the Decision by the Courts , state that the General Elections was Fair & Valid , Ms. King
    & Others , would resort to seeking Medical Attention .

  5. As…Fang says, the Government doesn’t have to prove a darn thing. Let Arnhim, Vynnette, Dougie and Luzette the NDP (Naturally Dumbass Person) bring forward their proof.
    Time for another “comedy special” from the NDP! “Me ha me popcorn, en soda, en me 3D glasses ready”. Bring it on!

  6. ULP will get what they want. It will be impossible to prove the accusations against them. They have the upper hand and will use it to strike at those who oppose them. So what else is new?

  7. That aint really the question ; because , it aint the ULP Government , that is protesting the
    recent General Elections . It is the NDP . Obviously therefore , the onus is on the NDP to
    prove in a Court of Law that the Elections were stolen .

    This really aint Rocket Science , This is a very basic principle , and I expected that the Author
    of this article would have known this fact . People need to think carefully before writing Nonsense ; in a vain attempt to get their 15 minutes of Fame . It would be wise that they do
    not allow what they write to be clouded by Political bias .

Comments closed.