The Alliance For Change (AFC) Chairman, Khemraj Ramjattan, yesterday during a special press briefing, said that the party and its partner GAP-ROAR have been vindicated by the Guyana Court of Appeal in their demand to be formally included in the House to House Registration exercise which commenced in January,Cheap Manchester United Jersey, 2008.Leader of the AFC, Raphael Trotman, noted that the credibility of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) is now in disrepute; further their ability to host a fair election would also be subjected to scrutiny.Ramjattan said in an opening statement at the press briefing that GECOM would do well to commence a process to rehabilitate its lost creditability.This lost credibility is not only due to the judgement that affirmed the proportional allocation of funds for scrutineering the House to House registration by political opposition parties “but also the condemnation by the Court which found GECOM’s conduct in not responding with an affidavit in answer to the affidavit David Patterson and Everall Franklin filed in the High Court, as wholly unacceptable for a constitutional body of such high importance in a matter of such gravity.”Ramjattan added,Alex Sandro Jersey, “This approach by GECOM in wanting to appeal a decision of a Judge it felt no reason to enter an appearance before was rightly condemned by the Court of Appeal.”Regarding the credibility of the National Voters’ Registration Database or voters’ list that is currently being prepared without scrutineers given that they have not been paid ever since April,Arturo Vidal Jersey, Trotman said that his party reserved the right to challenge the list’s authenticity.“The absence of scrutineers diminishes the integrity of the list,” said Ramjattan.Trotman also added that GECOM has entered into a confrontational situation with the AFC in that it firstly denied a parliamentary seat won in Region 10. “We were told (by GECOM) that it was a genuine mistake and the court would be used to correct it now they are actually challenging…Secondly by appealing a court where they should have appeared as neutral.”Trotman note that the court ruling only stated that the scrutineers’ money should have been allocated proportionately but by challenging it they have become confrontational.As such, Trotman added that by GECOM’s own doing,Barcelona Jerseys, it has placed itself in jeopardy with regards its ability to conduct in future any elections freely and impartially. “We are not convinced that they are behaving in a neutral manner.”?According to Ramjattan, all that was asked for at the time was to be treated with respect by GECOM by having AFC scrutineers remunerated in the same way as the other parliamentary parties’ scrutineers were.AFC computations place the shared figure $21M for AFC/GAP/ROAR.He noted also that,Custom Manchester United Jerseys, ” The AFC feels that GECOM’s behaviour in this regard was tantamount to that of a criminal suspect who holds on to his right to silence yet wants to make legal submissions.The objective must now be to work towards a genuinely professional, independent and fair culture in this important constitutional body…GECOM now has no other option and the first thing that it can start doing in this regard is to request of both the PPP/C and PNC/R to itemize the names of each scrutineer who worked and the days each worked and the monies paid to each and publicise this information on its website for public scrutiny.”This, Ramjattan said, would bring to an end speculation about a creaming off of some $36m by the leaders of the PNCR and a further $40m by the leaders of the PPP/C, of the respective $100m each.Ramjattan also emphasised that the Party is very pleased with the judgment of the court as handed down by Acting Chancellor Carl Singh in which GECOM’s appeal on every ground argued was dismissed.“Though the determination of the case may be a victory without any prize for the AFC – the PNC and PPP having already shared out amongst themselves nearly $200 million, the Guyanese people are the biggest winners on two very important legal issues…Firstly, the principle is now firmly established that GECOM as a constitutional entity must act fairly when deliberating on matters within its portfolio least it suffer scrutiny by our Judiciary if it does not…Secondly, the significant precedent is now established locally that any public-spirited citizen/taxpayer will have locus standi (right of identifiable status) to institute legal proceedings for remedies against any Government wrong-doing, so as to ensure the upholding of the Rule of Law.”He also added that the judgment must be seen as a stinging rebuke of the President’s “ill-advised com