Dear Editor,
The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) has now found itself, as it were, between a rock and a hard place on the issue of consequential orders pertaining to the no-confidence vote and the appointment of a new GECOM Chairman.
Not wanting to impose itself on the political processes but at the same time keen on upholding the Constitution and the Rule of Law, the Court has ruled that the relevant parties make written submissions to the CCJ by July 1 on what they would like to see in the Orders, after which the Court will finally issue Consequential Orders on July 12, as it sees fit.
The hope is that in the intervening period the parties will engage each other with a view to making some accommodation on the issues on the date of elections and the appointment of a new GECOM Chairman.
Part of the difficulty has to do with the attitude of the APNU+AFC coalition which seems to be premised on a belief that it could bully its way with little or no regard for the Constitution. Such an attitude is unhelpful in the search for a solution to the political and constitutional impasse in which the country has now found itself.
President David Granger has issued an invitation to the Leader of the Opposition for discussions on the way forward. This is an encouraging step but unless these talks are done in good faith and with an open mind to make compromises with due regard to the provisions of the Constitution, it will end up once again as a wasted opportunity. The biggest hurdle is the issue of a new Voter’s List based on house-to-house registration which, based on past experience, would take an inordinately long time and thereby extend the date for elections beyond reasonable parameters.
GECOM, through its legal representative, has indicated that it would not be in a position to hold elections until after December 25. This is puzzling, especially when seen against the background of its constitutional mandate to be ready for elections at short notice and the Commission’s enhanced institutional and operational capacity following the introduction of continuous registration some years ago.
I believe a way can be found to sanitize the existing Voter’s List without recourse to house-to house registration. This could be done by way of an extended Claims and Objections period to address concerns of new additions to the list, removal of dead names and those who no longer meet the eligibility criteria as stipulated by the Constitution.
Yours faithfully,
Hydar Ally
