Almost one year after it released the draft amendments to the Representation of the People Act (RoPA), the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs and Governance yesterday held the first national stakeholders’ consultation where it informed that government is proposing the subdivision of Electoral Districts Three, Four and Six.
The information was relayed by Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs Anil Nandlall SC during his address to the eighty-plus attendees from civil society, government and the Opposition.
The stakeholder consultation was called to discuss the government’s proposed amendments to RoPA and the National Registration Act (NRA) and was held at the Arthur Chung Conference Centre. The draft amendments are a result of the attempts to rig the March 2 2020 general and regional elections, which saw a five-month delay between balloting and the declaration of the final results.
The electoral reform agenda has been adopted by the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs and Governance and Minister Gail Teixeira reminded that the process is a statutory one and matters relating to altering the constitution will not be entertained. She noted that the event was organised for the government to gather feedback from the various civil society bodies and individuals on the recommendations it could take on board.
Last November, the government released amendments to RoPA. One of the major changes the government proposes is the division of Region Four (Demerara-Mahaica), the country’s largest electoral district, into four sub-districts – East Bank Demerara, East Coast Demerara, North Georgetown and South Georgetown – effectively adding a new section to Section 6 of RoPA, which deals with polling districts and divisions.
Among the proposed amendments are the introduction of hefty fines and lengthy jail time for several election-related offences. The fines are in the millions while jail time ranges from three years to life.
At yesterday’s consultation, AG Nandlall reminded that the draft amendments to both ROPA and the NRA are a result of the attempts to rig the March 2 2020 general and regional elections, which saw a five-month delay between balloting and the declaration of the final results.
He noted that when the RoPA amendments targeting Region Four were initially released, concerns were raised about the optics of government attempting to introduce legislation to possibly alter the results in its favour. However, he reminded that it was in Region Four that all of the issues developed at the 2020 polls.
“When the proposals were made public, the criticisms came. They said it is not our constituency, our stronghold and therefore we want to interfere with that region or that district. One of the bodies with whom we engaged during the first iteration of the public consultation made a recommendation that we should include other regions and subject them to the same and identical change.
“To demonstrate our commitment to a transparent and equitable process, we immediately complied and we used the rationale of a voting population to do so. So we included a known stronghold of the PPP – Region Six and a known stronghold of the PPP – Region Three. So Region Three, Region Four and Region Six will receive the identical treatment in relation to the proposals,” Nandlall informed.
That is addressed in a new Section 6A in the draft RoPA amendments.
The consultation was told that both Regions Three and Six will be divided into three sub-districts while Region Four will have four. In the case of Region Three, the new sub-districts will be Essequibo Islands and River, St Lawrence to Cornelia Ida and Den Amstel to Arabio Creek.
Region Four is divided into East Bank Demerara, North Georgetown, South Georgetown and East Coast Demerara sub-districts while Region Six will see the introduction of East Bank Berbice to Canje, Upper Corentyne and Lower Corentyne sub-districts.
“These reforms are good for the system, they are good for the process, they are good for the country [and] they are good for democracy,” Nandlall asserted.
As part of the NRA draft amendments, government is addressing the issue of the removal of names from the National Register of Registrants (NRR). Removal of names from the NRR had been a contentious issue prior to the 2020 general election. Back in 2019, acting Chief Justice Roxane George declared that existing registrants could not be excised from a new voters’ list unless they were deceased or otherwise disqualified under Article 159 (2), (3) or (4) of the Constitution.
Currently, section 8 of the existing National Registration Act states “without prejudice to the provisions of section 15 (6), the registration of a person may be cancelled or altered in accordance with any regulations made on that behalf.”
Section 15 (16) says that the Commissioner of Registration shall only make changes to the NRR following claims and objections.
The proposed amendment sees the introduction of sections 8 (a) and (b).
Section 8 (a) speaks to the list of dead persons to be sent to the Commissioner of Registration. It provides that the Registrar General of Births and Deaths, upon the request of the Commissioner of Registration, would send a list of all persons 14 years and older whose deaths have been registered. That is to be done once every month.
The new section 8 (b) outlines the process for the cancellation of the registration of persons who are dead. It states “…the registration of any person under this Act whose name is on the list of dead persons sent by the Registrar General to the Commissioner under section 8A shall be cancelled. (2) The Commissioner shall prepare a list from the central register for every division comprising names of persons registered in the division that are on the list of dead persons sent by the Registrar General and certify and send the list to the registration officer of the division.”
Registration officers in every division will submit the list of names of dead persons as a separate list to claims and objections under section 15 of the existing Act. The registration officers, accompanied by scrutineers, will visit the address of the person listed as dead, to verify the information.
Better served in the hinterland
Meanwhile, Chairman of the International Decade for People of African Descent Assembly-Guyana (IDPADA-G) Vincent Alexander dissented with the proposal to subdivide the coastal electoral districts. Instead, he said that it will be better implemented in the hinterland regions instead.
“If one is speaking of efficiency in terms of how quickly we get the results and things like that then those sub-divisions are more pertinent in the hinterland regions. The coastal regions logistically are able to move their materials, their results and so much quicker to the centre than can occur in the hinterland. Each of these hinterland regions has sub-districts that cannot move results overnight, they have to wait until the very next day to move those results.
“It may in fact, be more efficient if they can have these subdivisions so that the results can be subdivisional levels can produced, rather than waiting on all of them to be produced all at once at the district level given the logistical issues of moving material and moving results from one sub-district to another,” the GECOM Commissioner said.
In response, Nandlall reminded that the creation of the subdivisions, particularly in Region Four, is to “avoid Mingo-ism” and what happened in the 2020 elections.
During his comments, Alexander said when laws are being created, repealed or amended then they should not collide with constitutional provisions. He added that there should be strict respect for the jurisdiction of the various bodies as well.
Alexander said that with constitutional reform on the horizon, he believes that the amendments are preemptive and prejudicial.
“We have the process wrong. We should really have a sequential process or a holistic process which does not allow for a situation where the inferior laws kind of preempt what will happen,” he said.
The GECOM Commissioner also argued that not all deaths are registered and that depending on the Registrar of Births and Deaths for the cleansing of the list is not a step in the right direction. He also highlighted that there are thousands of Guyanese living in the diaspora and questioned how the government intends to deal with the deaths of those persons.
“…there is sufficient evidence at this point in time that has not been contested of the names of persons who the relevant statutory body had verified to have been overseas which were ticked off as persons who would have cast a vote. So it is not a question of just people overseas but here I am addressing this specific question of Guyanese who die overseas and from who at this point in time we have no mechanism to remove their names from the list and that can lend to a mischief which has been verified,” Alexander said.
While addressing Alexander’s comments, Nandlall said that waiting on constitutional reform to occur would mean that government would have to suspend its legislative agenda. He reminded that the last constitutional reform process took two years to be completed.
“Mr Alexander is experienced enough to know the complexity associated with constitutional reform, the political complexities that will flow therefrom and the consequential time that will be consumed by that process to arrive at a consensus. Constitutional reform of any significant aspect of our constitutional matrix requires a two-thirds majority on any provision of substance,” he said.
In relation to the cleansing of the list, Nandall said that in excess of 90% of the deaths occurring within Guyana are registered and called on Alexander to put forward a mechanism to deal with addressing those unregistered deaths. Nandlall reminded Alexander that as a Commissioner at GECOM, he also has a duty to find mechanisms to address the system as well.
Walked out
The entire engagement lasted just over four hours and saw Nandlall delivering an opening address and general overview of the amendments for just about 90 minutes. The consultative phase of the engagement lasted just under 90 minutes.
The APNU+AFC Opposition, after initially indicating that it would not be participating and then backtracking on that statement, was represented by Khemraj Ramjattan, Roysdale Forde and Tabitha Sarabo-Halley. During Nandlall’s opening remarks, the trio appeared impatient and eventually walked out after possibly realizing that the AG was nowhere near finished. While walking out, Ramjattan could be heard saying “take y’all consultation man.”
Additionally, Yog Mahadeo of civil society group Article 13 also walked out of the consultation after accusing Minister Joe Hamilton of inappropriate behaviour. Hamilton reportedly shared a photo on his Facebook page showing Alexander and Christopher Ram napping.
Several other individuals also made comments on the amendments proposed by the government.
The Government said that it will take the comments and recommendations and see how it could incorporate them into the amendments before the final bill is tabled in the National Assembly.
