A recent controversial opinion from the legal officer of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) is “water under the bridge” according to Government-nominated Commissioner Vincent Alexander.
“ I don’t think the legal opinion is before us for consideration at this time because these are matters which are before the court at this time…the matter is sub judice…for all intents and purposes we are not discussing the substance of that opinion. The substance of the opinion is water under the bridge,” Alexander told reporters following yesterday’s meeting of the commission.
He went on to state that while GECOM chair, retired Justice James Patterson acknowledged receiving the opinion before it was tabled at last week’s commission meeting the chair “couldn’t recall the date” on which he received the opinion.
The legal officer Excellence Dazzell had opined to the commission that a new voter’s list is not required as “based on (elections law), the list must be updated bi-annually by adding persons who are now qualified to be registered, to that list, and those who are no longer qualified to be registered, to be taken off that list….”
She went on to advise that “procedures be put in place to ensure the revision of the list, otherwise the Commission would be acting in defiance of the law and may prejudice any by-election that may become necessary.”
Dazzell’s opinion which was based on her interpretation of section 7. (1) of the Elections Amendment Act (2000) and the Local Authorities (Elections) (Amend-ment) Act of 2018 could prove important as GECOM has repeatedly stated the availability of a valid list significantly affects the timeline within which it can produce a credible election.
According to Opposition-nominated Commissioner Sase Gunraj not only did Patterson acknowledge receipt of the opinion prior to April 30 but it was because of his acquiescence that the opinion made it to the full commission.
“The Chairman has acknowledged that he received and perused that report prior…the Chairman has said he saw the opinion sometime before the expiration of the list…that is before April 30, Gunraj stressed to reporters yesterday.
He went on to note that the opinion is nothing new rather it is a recitation of the law.
Last week’s Government-nominated Commissioner Desmond Trotman questioned the “timing” of the tabling which Alexander referred to as “conspicuous” yesterday.
Trotman told reporters last Tuesday that “we have never agreed at the commission…but suddenly yesterday, last night actually, I saw it for the first time there was some correspondence from her [Dazzell], which included a memo on this matter. And because, as far as I know, there was no agreement on that, I raised it today as a matter of concern. And I pointed out that the way in which it appeared before the commission had to do with some form of deceit by the legal officer.”
He went on to state that the appearance of the opinion lends to suspicions as while Dazzell claimed she had put together the opinion sometime in April she never told the commission that “she has an opinion in draft” despite the number of times the matter was raised at meetings.
Alexander made similar claims noting that the opinion which was “lying around” was not presented before.
