Our readers would by now be aware that GECOM today (Friday, Dec 10th) announced its selection of Vishnu Persaud as Chief Elections Office of GECOM. Given all we have said below, we are both disappointed and alarmed that GECOM (and in particular its Chair, Justice Singh) decided to appoint an underqualified candidate to such a critical position—a position that requires integrity, competence, and the confidence of the public. CONPOV intends to shortly give its views on the way forward on this matter. For now, we stick to our position below.
Something funny is happening at GECOM that is both mind boggling and alarming. GECOM’s process to select its CEO should be a cause for national concern.
GECOM invited applications from candidates who possessed post graduate degree in law, public administration, management, or other relevant disciplines. At least ten (10) years’ experience in management of national elections and election system was categorically declared a prerequisite.
On November 30, 2021, PPP GECOM Commissioner, Bibi Shadick, said only Vishnu Persaud met the requirements and should be appointed within a week. She did not even see the need for an interview. However, in a letter published on December 7, 2021, Sam White painted a different picture. Sam White argued that Vishnu Persaud did not meet the academic requirements because he has a master’s in business administration, not a master’s in public administration. He claimed a master’s in business administration is not relatable to the work at GECOM. He also questioned Vishnu Persaud’s experience.
Review of public records has confirmed Sam White’s concerns. Vishnu Persaud stated on his LinkedIn profile that he holds a master’s in business administration. This clearly is not public administration as required by GECOM. However, GECOM could have decided it is a relevant discipline. If so, GECOM must clarify if other candidates were granted a similar concession.
A review of Vishnu Persaud’s claimed experience posted on LinkedIn reveals even greater problems. He represented that he “Orchestrated the execution of key projects through rigorous planning and strategic implementation.” He claimed he managed all field operations and planned and directed the implementation of voter registration and election projects for 2015 and 2016 elections. This is a gross misrepresentation of Vishnu Persaud’s work at GECOM, and GECOM surely should have the ability to verify the validity of these claims.
The truth about Vishnu Persaud is that he loafed on the job for three (3) years as DCEO. He did not lead any projects and did not seem bothered by it. Most of his written submissions had to be reworked by others, or he had to be given an assistant to look over his shoulders. This is not surprising given the grades he obtained when he was reading for his masters at Anglia Ruskin University. It is amazing Anglia Ruskin allowed him to graduate with such grades. Consistently poor grades across the board points to a student who is weak analytically and intellectually, period. The man demonstrated no strong areas. Every single course was a case of a weak and struggling student, who might have needed the lecturer’s concession to pass.
Another issue is the entry requirements for ANGLIA RUSHKIN UNIVERSITY. According to their website, the entrance requirement for students from Guyana is a CDC O’Levels for foundation, CAPE 6 units or A-Levels for first year degree, and a bachelor’s degree for pre-masters. Vishnu Persuade is on record as admitting he does not have a bachelor’s degree. So then, how did he gain admission to Anglia Rushkin University? Answers are needed for this question, because we cannot have a man who is under a cloud of fraudulent academic claims leading an organization where integrity, transparency, and honesty must be the hallmark.
The fact that the PPP identified Vishnu Persaud as the hill they are prepared to die on raises some important questions. Why would the PPP choose a candidate with a known track record of incompetence, one whose academic records clearly show what he is not, rather than what he is? Why would they declare such a weak candidate as standing above all others, so much so that interviews were not needed? Why would they want to install a man they know cannot do the work?
The answer is simple. Installing a man who knows he is not equipped for the job will result in a loyal servant. The PPP does not want a CEO who is appointed based on merit. They want a CEO who is so grateful he will follow their dictates. The PPP has political reasons, but what about GECOM Chair Justice Claudette Singh?
Clearly the Chair has information about Vishnu Persaud’s poor performance at GECOM. Surely she knows that his role as PRO could in no shape or form be considered experience in election management. Surely she knows that all the experience Vishnu Persaud could rightly claim is three (3) years of poor performance as DCEO. Why then would she support a candidate, who so obviously fails to meet the requirements, to be one of the two to be interviewed? On November 30th, when Bibi Shadick declared Vishnu Persaud will be installed without interview, was she assured of GECOM chair support?
This should be alarming for all Guyanese. Justice Singh must reassure the nation of her independence and her respect for the rules and processes of the organization she leads.