The Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) as part of its submission to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) in the No Confidence case has said that it fulfilled its duties and responsibilities.
Further, according to the submission filed in response to Christopher Ram by Excellence Dazzell and Trinidadian Senior Coun-sel Stanley Marcus, an Official List of Voters (OLV) is different from an Official List of Electors (OLE).
The OLV is compiled for Local Government Elections while an OLE is compiled for General and Regional Elections.
The submission goes on to state that while there were 80 OLVs for the November 2018 LGE they did not constitute an OLE.
“These official list of voters even if combined do not constitute an official list of electors. In addition the residency rules that are applied are different for local government elections from those for General and Regional Elections,” it reads.
It is not immediately clear which of Ram’s arguments this statement is meant to refute as the attorneys conclude the point with the statement that the “commission should be allowed to put itself in a state of readiness to conduct general elections that will be credible, fair, and totally acceptable by all interested parties and the electorate.”
The case comes up at the CCJ today in Trinidad and Tobago.
The nine-page submission argues in turn that GECOM could not hold elections within the three-month period specified in Article 106 of the constitution because the matter was the subject of court cases; because President David Granger had not named a date and because it did not have the necessary funds.
“There is no basis for blame or criticism when anyone, approaches the courts to have a dispute resolved…the parties were within their constitutional right to have the issue ventilated and the commission was left with no alternative than to await the outcome of the litigation,” the submission notes at one point before going on to stress that “It is for His Excellency the President to determine the date, taking into consideration all pertinent factors including the readiness of the elections commission to conduct credible elections with impartiality and fairness.”
It further noted that the commission in turn must advise the president as to its readiness… in the foreground of which is funding without which it cannot perform its functions.
The court on the basis of this argument supported by Articles 62,161 and 162 of the constitution is called on to “decline the invitation to perform the function of the President and the commission.”
Additionally GECOM stresses in its submission that the constitution at Article 106(7) “envisaged that in a the special circumstances of a vote of no confidence, three months might prove inadequate for preparation generally but more especially by the commission, and the constitutional authority and responsibility to make such a determination rest solely with the commission that is placed to determine the adequacy of time and to advise the President accordingly.”
GECOM had been added by the court as a party to the series of cases surrounding the December 21 No Confidence Vote following a case management meeting on March 29.
Underscoring
At that meeting President of the CCJ Justice Adrian Saunders underscoring what he described as the importance of GECOM in the proceedings involving the no-confidence motion and ordered that the entity be added as a party.
Ram had applied for GECOM to be added as a party. The court, however, dismissed a similar application for President Granger to also be added as a party. On this point, Justice Saunders reminded that all suits against the state which embodies the executive/president have to be brought against the AG, since the president cannot be sued in any personal capacity and for which reason he would not have to be named a party to any litigation.
The court also expressed its desire for all attorneys to appear at the seat of the court in Trinidad for hearing of the appeal so that the occurrence of technical glitches would be minimised as the hearings would have to be done via teleconferencing.
The three appeals on the no-confidence motion are Christopher Ram against the Attorney General (AG), the Leader of the Opposition and Minister of State Joseph Harmon; Bharrat Jagdeo against the AG, Speaker of the National Assembly Dr Barton Scotland and Harmon; and Charrandass Persaud against Compton Herbert Reid, Dr Scotland, Jagdeo and Harmon.
Ram had sought to have his application urgently heard and determined within seven days, with the abridgment of all timelines as is necessary in order to prevent the “violation of the Constitution” and “the threat to democracy and adherence to the rule of law” that follow from that violation.
Ram had asked the court to, among other things, validate the December 21st passage of the motion by the National Assembly and to order that President Granger and GECOM ensure that elections are held no later than April 29th, 2019.
The no-confidence motion, sponsored by Jagdeo, was declared passed by Speaker Dr Scotland following a vote in its favour by then APNU+AFC parliamentarian Charrandass Persaud on the night of December 21st.
Following a challenge by government in the High Court, Chief Justice (Ag) Roxane George-Wiltshire found that even though Persaud was made a parliamentarian in violation of the Constitution, his vote was valid and that the December 21st no-confidence motion against the APNU+AFC government was validly passed with the votes of 33 elected members of the 65-member Assembly. She has also ruled that the passage of the motion should have triggered the immediate resignation of the Cabinet, including the President.
The Guyana Court of Appeal, by a majority decision overturned the Chief Justice’s ruling, saying that the correct mathematical formula for finding the “absolute” majority was not used.
While Chancellor Yonette Cummings-Edwards (Ag) and Justice of Appeal Dawn Gregory agreed that 34 votes were required for the motion to be carried, Justice of Appeal Rishi Persaud dissented.
Meanwhile after nine weeks of aborted meetings GECOM yesterday finally had a full meeting at which they spent two hours discussing nine weeks’ worth of minutes.
According to Commissioners Sase Gunraj and Desmond Trotman the seven members of the commission spent yesterday afternoon looking at 10 sets of minutes from the meetings aborted.
“By the time we were finished with the minutes the Chairman indicated that he had to leave so there were no agenda items discussed,” Gunraj explained.
