Last week protesters from APNU demonstrated outside of the premises of the Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission, Dr Steve Surujbally and Chief Election Officer, Mr Gocool Boodoo. Regardless of the legitimacy of the demonstrators’ concerns, the protests at the homes of these two elections officials were out of order. The proper place for these displays of dissent is the office occupied by the two. Neither they nor their families should be intimidated within their homes.
In our estimation much of the aggravation that derived from this election sprung from the structure of GECOM, its vulnerability to political influence and interference and its steadfast refusal to address the need for an early declaration of results. Those fundamental flaws aside, election day employees and their managers worked sedulously to ensure efficient voting and tallying of votes at the individual polling stations. Thereafter, the process went astray as it has in previous elections.
Stabroek News has argued for over 15 years that the Carter-Price formula for the elections commission is an anachronism that belongs in the dustbin of history. It served its purpose for the 1992 general elections and should have then been abandoned in favour of a fully technocratic commission comprised of capable and trustworthy members of society. There is no place in a heavily polarized society like Guyana’s for a commission to be composed of three members representing the governing party and three members from the opposition with a chairman selected by the President from a list supplied by the opposition.
In an editorial following the 2006 general elections we said the following: “Civil society and others have long argued that the Carter formula deepens and hardens the political divisions at the level of the elections commission and unnecessarily causes polarization in relation to simple technical matters which the political parties sometime try to exploit for their advantage. The Carter formula for the 1992 elections was intended to pave the way for an honourable settlement between the PNC and the opposition in the midst of the transition from the era of rigged elections to the rebirth of democracy. The Carter formula is no longer usable and is downright dangerous to the health of the nation. It must be discarded. Clearly neither the PPP/C nor the PNCR is of this persuasion because they view their ability to decide who should sit on GECOM as beneficial to their interest.”
Thus when the PPP/C grew worried this year about the likely results of the general elections it turned the screws on GECOM for an extension of the claims and objections period when there was little sense behind it. This was at a significant cost to the Commission and further narrowed an already tight elections schedule. When it became evident after the November 28 general elections that it needed to squeeze a few more votes for a chance at an unlikely majority the PPP/C prevailed upon GECOM to allow a recount in Region Three and other places. This recount request was withdrawn after a boisterous Region Three foray by the party likely indicated that nothing productive would flow. Events like these which reflect on GECOM’s judgement, build suspicions in the minds of discerning members of the public and when these reach a tipping point they manifest in protests among other things. The opposition has also availed itself of these opportunities at the level of the Commission. The immersion of GECOM in political-type decision-making increases the risk of fuelling public dissent and distrust of the elections and this is evident at the moment.
The other serious problem which has arisen with elections since 1992 is the exasperating sloth of tabulation and release of the final results. These days, unless you are the Democratic Republic of the Congo or Guyana, preliminary results with the majority of the votes counted and tabulated are available on the night of the poll or the next day at least.
This year the results again followed the pattern of the 2006 elections. Voting occurred on Monday and results were released on Thursday. This year, the Chairman, Dr Surujbally even boasted that the results were delivered several hours earlier than in 2006 without apparently recognizing the core problem. In the highly competitive and distrusting atmosphere that elections have been held here for decades, any unreasonable delay in the results of the elections leads to the cultivation of doubts about the integrity of the elections and also provides fertile ground for those who wish to prospect in rumour and destabilization. An electorate on edge will not sit peaceably and wait for nearly 72 hours after the close of polling for a result when they have become accustomed to much larger democracies producing same day results. Ironically, St Lucia held its elections on the very day as Guyana’s and on the night of the 28th, it was known that Mr Kenny Anthony had been returned to power.
The oft ventured argument from GECOM that communication with interior polling stations and the need for possession of the original statements of poll have delayed results has never been acceptable. The other excuse of careful computing taking up time is also not credible. GECOM has had years of experience at this. Counting and tabulating around 400,000 votes should not be transformed into some complex foray into algorithms.
While GECOM may have avoided serious condemnation in 2006 over the delayed results, the conditions in 2011 were quite different. There was an invigorated opposition and a real sense that the ruling party was vulnerable and facing an adverse result. These expectations coupled with the slow release of tabulated results and repeated delays provided fertile ground for members of the public to begin claiming that fraud was afoot and to make other charges. Once those charges were made and circulated by Guyana’s gossip mill and the even more efficient Facebook, GECOM was on the back foot and unable to rebuff and contain the rumours.
On November 2, 2010, around a year ago, Stabroek News editorialized as follows as it relates to the release of results.
“…the (Guyana Elections) Commission should address the public on the matter of the declaration of results of the elections. The result of the election, the final tidying up of numbers notwithstanding, must be known on election night. This is also a crucial component of confidence in the process and it cuts through the tension that builds inexorably each day that passes without a result. The usual lamentation of Region Four results not being delivered must be overcome.”
GECOM never made an effort to begin addressing the problem raised in the editorial a year ago neither did the two main parties. In the period that followed the smooth running of the November 28 poll, dozens of rumours flew wildly and these gave rise to the allegations that Statements of Poll could have been tampered with. It led inescapably to the pressure that GECOM faced over the elections.
It is likely that neither of the main parties was interested in a same night declaration of results by GECOM as they needed breathing room to explore other options such as recounts and to haggle at their party headquarters about the way ahead. These options have to be closed out completely in the next election be it local government or regional and general elections.
As to the allegation of the SOPs being tampered with and numbers changed, the truth will be quickly established among the parties. Each party agent in a polling station received a copy of the SoP on November 28. A sampling of the statements from APNU, AFC and GECOM should be able to conclusively tell whether there are any differences indicative of tampering. The beauty of counting at the place of polling is that it endows at least three or four persons with a copy of the SoP and therefore makes it unlikely that there could be tampering with the numbers by any one of them. The only other area for legitimate concern would be to ensure that the over 2000 SoPs were correctly tabulated.
The prospect that there could soon be local government elections should motivate the parties in this delicately balanced Parliament to address the revamping of GECOM and ensuring the rapid compilation and release of election results.
