Dear Editor,
Since October 19, 2017, Mr. David Granger (currently the Caretaker President of Guyana) has used a variety of ploys to delay adherence to the Constitution. After months of judicial proceedings and political pressure applied by the opposition on the streets of Guyana, the nation finally has a legitimate Chairman of GECOM replacing Mr. Patterson whose appointment was struck down by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) as flawed. The new Chairman enjoys the support of both the political opposition and the PNCR-led APNU+AFC and is armed with clear direction from the apex court of the land. The CCJ judgment on June 18, 2019, confirmed that the provisions of Article 106 have been “triggered” with the vote in the National Assembly conducted on December 21, 2018, with a clear road map. What is this road map?
Article 106 permits the Government to remain in office but ordains that it, “shall hold an election within three months, or such longer period as the National Assembly shall … by not less than two-thirds of the votes of all the elected members” determine. Like the Guyana constitution, the CCJ legal luminaries could not have expressed themselves any clearer. A primary school student can understand this language. But, judging from the various interpretations offered by the President and his ministers, it appears that they are having difficulty understanding the law. Alternatively, it could also be a convenient misinterpretation. Either way, it flies in the face of the “faithfully execute and defend the constitution” oath that the President swore to back in 2015.
The Leader of the Opposition has stated in the press that he is not heading to Parliament without the date of an election in hand. We find that position to be reasonable and rational and therefore we expect him to keep his word. Without the support of the opposition in the National Assembly, the timeframe of three months from June 18, 2019, cannot be legally extended. Beyond this deadline, the government will be seen as illegitimate. This will have severe economic and political consequences.
Where do we go from here?
The new GECOM Chairman Justice Claudette Singh is a trained legal practitioner who has the benefit of being one of the few judges in the Caribbean that presided in a major election-related case. She has the experience, understands the system and is aware of the laws to get the job done. But, she does not have the luxury of idle time. She has two options at her disposal, compliance or non–compliance with the law. The law demands general and regional elections before September 18, 2019, and thus GECOM is in a sticky position. The only way GECOM can secure compliance with the law is to use a tried and tested process to update the list using a short, transparent and open claims and objections process.
This adventure called House-to-House (H-2-H) should not be on the table since, from its past reputation, it can take up to 18 months to complete. Even if GECOM puts 30,000 operators in the field, it cannot complete this task within 12 months. The December 25, 2019 timeline offered to the CCJ by counsel for the Chief Election Officer (CEO) Keith Lowenfield using this H-2-H process is not just unrealistic but appears to serve a political purpose rather than an administrative one. It is imperative that Justice Claudette Singh arrests this apparent descent of GECOM into partisan politics instead of maintaining its non-partisanship and independence. Further, GECOM must be pragmatic and live within the law. To have a credible list by September 18, 2019, it has no choice but to use the claims and objections process which has successfully delivered credible lists in a short time in the past.
A four-weeks claims and objections period that is accessible (as many locations as possible), available (long hours 12 hours for 7 days a week) and transparent (scrutineers from all political parties and civil society organizations) could produce a credible list. As an outcome from that process, GECOM can provide Mr. Granger with a date when the voters’ list will be produced, a date Mr. Granger can use to set a date for elections. This process will allow GECOM enough time to host Nomination Day and conduct all their administrative duties to hold free and fair elections such as the printing of ballot papers. This process is also likely to receive Mr. Jagdeo’s support for a short extension of the constitutional deadline to ensure all are kept within the law.
This proposal is reasonable for all parties. Thus, we call on the Justice Claudette Singh to seize control of this situation. Her immediate intervention is also necessary to ensure GECOM retains the confidence of the Guyanese people, complies with the constitution and not be seen as a partisan entity. The absence of a legitimate Chairman of GECOM had allowed Mr. Keith Lowenfield unchecked authority which unfortunately has been used in a manner that cast doubts on the commission’s autonomy and independence. The clock is ticking as democracy and the future of Guyana hang in the balance. We urge Justice Singh to act decisively and do so with utmost urgency.
Yours faithfully,
Sasenarine Singh
Dhanraj Singh,
Executive Director, Guyana Budget
Policy Institute
