Dear Editor,
According to information available via the media, the chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) has decided in favour of the exclusion of the particulars of registrants/electors from the Revised List of Electors (RLE) which will naturally follow the ongoing Claims and Objections exercise. This would mean that the concerned persons would also be excluded from the Official List of Electors (OLE) to be produced for the imminent General and Regional Elections.
As of now, I am treating this information as not being the official position of GECOM since it has not come from the chairman herself nor from a GECOM media release. And even if it were the official stance of GECOM, it cannot be an established position that is beyond review considering that GECOM has no legal authority to exclude, from any ‘voters’ list’ bona fide registrants who meet the criteria for inclusion and; there is precedence of GECOM having revisited and overturned previous decisions, under the stewardship of former GECOM Chairman, Dr Steve Surujbally, in the best interest of the free, fair and transparent conduct of registration and electoral projects.
The ongoing controversy that has been generated by the abovementioned GECOM position necessitates that I make a contribution, albeit from the outside with the hope and expectation that, by outlining indisputable facts, I would have provided valuable grounds for GECOM to revisit this matter towards ensuring that no eligible person is denied his/her constitutionally guaranteed right to vote to elect a government of his/her choice. It is in this regard that I note the following:
1. Article 42 of the Constitution provides the authority for persons entitled to be registered as citizens. Accordingly, Article 42(2) provides that “any application for registration under this article shall be made in such manner as may be prescribed.”
2. The National Registration Act, Chapter 19:08 provide the prescriptions for the registration of citizens of Guyana as mandated by Article 42 of the Constitution.
3. Specifically, Section 6 of the National Registration Act provide the conditions for registration of persons as citizens of Guyana.
4. Section 9 of the National Registration Act mandates the Commissioner of Registration (the Chief Election Officer is also the Commissioner of Registration) to “establish a Central Register” of Registrants which is the National Register of Registrants (NRR).
5. Section 8 of the National Registration Act provides that “without prejudice to the provisions of section 15(6), the registration of a person may (my emphasis) be cancelled or altered in accordance with any regulations made in that behalf.”
6. Section 14 of the National Registration Act, which deals with “Preparation of Preliminary Lists (PLE) prescribes that “…the Commission shall direct the Commissioner (of registration) to prepare a preliminary list in which he shall enter the full name, the address, the occupation and the serial number on every registration record of every (my emphasis) person registered for those purposes who is qualified for registration…” with reference to the qualifying date.
7. Section 15 of the National Registration Act, and the associated regulations delineated in the National Registration (Residents) Regulations, provides the prescriptions for the conduct of Claims and Objections.
8. Section 35 of the National Registration (Residents) Regulations provides that “the Commissioner (of Registration) shall revise the list (including that for each registration division) by way of the annexation thereto of supplementary lists in such form as determined by the Commissioner containing all such changes and additions to the list (including that for any registration division) as are necessary from time to time by virtue of the final determination of claims and objections or by virtue of the Commissioner being satisfied that at the time of the publication of the preliminary list entries thereof were omitted and a supplementary list, together with the list or that for any division shall constitute the revised list or that for the respective division, as the case may be, at the date of the latest of such supplementary list.”
In consideration of the above, it is crucial for the following deductions to be noted:
a. Every registrant listed in the NRR met all of the criteria, including verification of their residency status, for registration before their applications were approved, culminating with their inclusion in the NRR. Hence, there can be no question about the legitimacy of persons listed in the NRR. In this regard, and since there is no proposal by or intention of GECOM to cancel the registration of anyone listed in the NRR, I will not deal with the issue of cancellation of registration.
b. It must be obvious to all concerned that the PLE, which is being used as the basis to conduct the ongoing Claims and Objections exercise, was properly prepared in accordance with the provisions of Section 14 of the National Registration Act resulting, specifically, in the capture of every person who met the criteria for inclusion therein.
c. Careful examination of all of the above referenced legislation will reveal that there is no provision for any elector listed in the PLE to be omitted from the ensuing RLE and OLE because of his/her failure to collect his/her National Identification Card from GECOM.
d. In fact, Regulation 35 of the National Registration (Residents) Regulations clearly stipulates the conditions associated with the preparation of the RLE. Essentially, the RLE will always contain the data included in the PLE as amended by GECOM on the basis of registration transactions done during Claims and Objections and approved by GECOM.
In view of the foregoing, it must be clear to all concerned that any exclusion of persons listed in the PLE from the RLE and OLE because they are yet to collect their National Identification Cards from GECOM would be without legal authority.
It is of crucial importance for all concerned to note that, universally, Election Management Bodies (EMBs) spare no effort to ensure that every elector is guaranteed his/her constitutional right to participate in elections and to vote for the election of a government of his/her choice. This is one of the pillars on which elections are democratically conducted in accordance with the relevant statutory provisions and international best practices. In this regard, it would be very detrimental to GECOM, and, by extension, the Guyanese nation as a whole, should bona fide electors by excluded from the OLE because they have not collected their National Identification Cards.
I would be among the first to agree that among those persons who have not collected their ID Cards would be those who have died or migrated. But what about those who are alive? What offence have they committed? Which legislation have they breached? Surely they cannot be penalised by being denied their right to vote because they have not collected their ID Cards i.e. an act that carries no punitive measure.
It is my considered view that, instead of illegally excluding the concerned persons from participation in the elections, GECOM must put in place legal and administrative checks and balances to guard against any form of skullduggery at the elections, but in this case specifically, voting by impersonation. This does not require any re-invention of the wheel. Such safeguards already exist and were applied successfully in General and Regional Elections since 2006.
In conclusion, I wish to note that the purpose of this letter is in no way, shape or form intended to undermine the integrity or work of GECOM or its staff, nor to demonstrate bias for or against any political party. My singular objective is to add clarity to any further deliberations on this matter which would result in no person who is eligible to vote at the upcoming elections being denied his/her constitutional right to so do.
Yours faithfully,
Vishnu Persaud
