What efforts have been made to implement recommendations from the various observer teams?

Dear Editor,

With reference to observers, one reflects as to what extent the professionals, starting with politicians, media, other analysts and, of course, those of the electoral institution itself, have paid heed to the reports of the various observer missions attending say the 2006 and 2011 elections.

It would be an interesting test as to how many of these concerned citizens could name those various observer teams, overseas and local. It would also be useful to learn how many of the reports have been read and have been publicly debated, not to mention how many of the valid recommendations efforts have been made to implement, like for example that of the Carter Center Observer Mission of 2006, whose report recommended the dismantling of President Carter’s very formula for putting together the Guyana Elections Commission, and replacing it with a more patently independent professional body – a model that obtains in some Caribbean countries and countries of the Commonwealth.

Perhaps, given the extant anxieties about possible upcoming elections, there may be a case for a sensible political/NGO grouping to review pertinent recommendations to put at the feet of the commission, and of course those of the public who can advocate appropriate pressure for implementation.

Those persons, who like the local (EAB) would have accessed these volumes of recommendations would attest to the extent of detailed commentary on actual methodologies to be corrected, preferably in the more immediate future.

What is also interesting is the quantum of exposure several on the commission have had to the management of elections in various countries of the world. Yet there is minimal evidence provided to the public of the benefits of these visits, fortunately funded by overseas donors.

The point is that it may not be too late to put what appears to be in order, in much better order.

One is concerned about the relative anonymity of the Chief Election Officer, and therefore not unreasonably about the individual’s capacity for independent and efficient delivery.

Yours faithfully,

E B John