HANDWRITING EXPERTS have been called in to test the authenticity of the signatures, which the United People's Party (UPP) has submitted to the Electoral Advisory Committee (EAC).

Danville Walker, Director of Elections, suggested to editors and senior reporters at The Gleaner's Editors' Forum on Wednesday, that the election body took the action to satisfy itself that the signatures sent in by the party were not fraudulent.

"We have to check them. I actually called in some handwriting experts to verify them," Mr. Walker said.

Contacted yesterday, Antonnette Haughton-Cardenas, UPP president, was cautious in rejecting suggestions that the signatures might be fraudulent.

"I can't say that every one of these signatures is authentic," she said, adding that during the collection of the 50,000 signatures over the last 12 months, the party had to throw out some, because it felt they were not genuine.

She said that as president of the party, she had to rely on her workers to bring in the signatures and so she was not in a position "to swear for other people."

This is the latest turn in the weeks-old dispute between the UPP and the EAC, over whether the one-year old party should be given the right to appoint election scrutineers to oversee the registration of voters.

As was the case with the National Democratic Movement in 1996, the EAC has required the UPP to provide a petition with 50,000 signatures, before it can be given the right to appoint election scrutineers.

Having this recognition from the EAC would also allow the party to satisfy Ministry of Finance requirements for it to import 25 duty-free motor vehicles for election campaigning.

Earlier this week, the EAC invited Mrs. Haughton-Cardenas to a meeting next Tuesday to clarify aspects of the petition. Mrs. Haughton-Cardenas told The Gleaner she was weary from her fight with the election body, but said she would attend the meeting.

The UPP petition was first submitted to the EAC a few weeks ago, but it was returned to the party because of concerns about the wording. According to Mr. Walker, the petition was improperly worded and left the EAC without any choice but to reject it.

Mrs. Haughton-Cardenas was then asked to submit a new petition accompanied by freshly-gathered signatures. However, the party merely recast the wording of the petition and sent it back to the EAC with the old signatures.

It was not clear from Mr. Walker whether the EAC would insist that the UPP go back into the field to gather new signatures, or it would relax its stance to accommodate the party.