At a news conference on Friday, April 29, Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo enunciated what he said was the government’s proposal to sanitise Guyana’s National Register of Registrants, from which the list of electors or voters’ list is derived every five years, and what has long been a bone of contention in quite possibly every national election held in this country to date. Claims that voters’ lists were padded, bloated, skewed or otherwise distorted have been made by politicians from both of the major political parties over many years. Complaints have also come from smaller parties and observers and continue to date.
Despite this, there have been no comprehensive attempts, to ensure the production of a decent and acceptable list of electors. Could it be that one of the reasons for this is that once in power, the winning party decides that an untidy list might better suit? Or is it the case perhaps, that the urgency becomes lost in that immediate headiness of running the country? Who knows? What is true is the fact that this argument could still be cited as grounds for lost elections is beyond ludicrous, and all who have been involved in any way with handling the reins of power for the past three decades at least, should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
As is well known, one of the pillars of democracy is free and fair elections. A list of electors that could be deemed inflated or appear to be in any way inaccurate muddles the concept of ‘free and fair’ and strikes a blow against that pillar. Utter transparency is therefore vital in this process. This is obviously not rocket science. It is a hypothesis that could probably be trotted out by any first year political science student. Since that is the case, one has to assume that it was political puppetry that has thus far played a huge role in the current state of the list.
But hope springs eternal; or does it? The current PPP/C government, according to Mr Jagdeo, proposes making the process transparent by way of legislation that would force the Guyana Elections Commission (Gecom) and the Chief Election Officer to annually remove the names of electors who died and publish both the names of those removed as well as the voters’ list in the newspapers. If achieved exactly as stated, the transparency in the process is likely to be ensured. Of course, the real test will be the alacrity with which this legislation is drafted, presented and passed. Lest we forget, the fast talk and slow dance with Anti-Money Laundering/Countering the Financing of Terrorism (Amendment) Bill in the not-so-distant past remain a case in point.
Meanwhile, the question as to the cause of the apparent gridlock that has been hampering the production of a sanitised list every five years must still be asked. The answer will no doubt lie somewhere in the general laissez-faire approach to life that bedevils us as a people.
We are living in the Information Age, which began somewhere around 1970 in the developed world, but came to this country fully at least 20 years later. Despite its late start, however, Guyana has managed to keep pace with the advances in modern technology that allow for digitisation and reliability of data, even in the face of its legendary unreliable electricity supply. Why then were no efforts made to set up systems linking Gecom and the necessary agencies that would discontinue the need for paperwork and bureaucracy over the reporting on deaths, prison terms, certified insanity and other impediments for the purpose of decluttering the electoral list?
Surely one of the many IT specialists born and bred in Guyana could have been contracted to set up a system or write a programme that accomplishes this annually? And if the argument is that there is no such local professional, then a request for this expertise could have successfully been made to any of the developed countries that champion democracy. Even now, it is not too late for either scenario.
International elections observers have recognised the shortcomings of the voters’ list and have repeatedly suggested, in their post-election reports, that attention be paid to reforming the voter registration system and sanitising the list. In 2015, the OAS Election Observer Mission’s report urged, “Nonetheless, the implementation of more robust procedures for periodic cleansing of the national voters list to remove deceased persons; and that ensures …ongoing updates of the voter registry would allow for a voter’s list that more accurately reflects the current Guyanese electorate.” This was repeated in its 2020 report. Furthermore, the Carter Center, which played a key role in the “return to democracy in 1992” that the PPP/C is so fond of banging on about is on record more than once, positing the need for “a broadly acceptable verification of the voters’ list”. Hopefully, the tendency to ignore these recommendations will now cease.
A list of electors of some 661,000 from a population of approximately 748,000 (2012 census was 747,884) is weird maths indeed and its inaccuracy has been noted and well ventilated. More likely, the 480,000-odd votes cast in 2020 were closer to the valid number of electors. The way forward is fixing this well before 2025 and doing so in a manner that is so transparent no one would be able to honestly cry foul. Another population census is due this year. It has been spoken of but there has been no movement on it thus far. That would be a good place to start as the data derived from the census would better inform the number on the national register from which the list is extracted. There is much work to be completed to restore confidence in our electoral system and it is time for all concerned to stop pussyfooting and get it done.
