GECOM shenanigans

In recent months there has been sufficient cause to be concerned that there is a rogue outfit operating within the elections secretariat/machinery to create maximum administrative confusion, further delay the scheduled general elections and to tinker with well-established timelines and schedules.

The decision to proceed with house to house (HtH) registration despite the fact that the supreme law of the land - the Constitution mandated general elections in three months or an amended period if necessary was the first major sign of trouble. The fallout from HtH is still being addressed and the major challenge remains the merging of raw data from the HtH with the error-free data of the preliminary voters list (PVL) which was extracted from the National Register of Registrants.

Then there was the inexplicable lengthening of the period for claims and objections from 35 days which had been agreed by the GECOM commissioners to 42 days when the order was published. Even more egregious was the advice in an official press release from GECOM that once the PVL was published, persons on that list had to visit a registration centre to confirm their particulars otherwise their names would not appear on the List of Electors. It had never been the requirement for persons on the PVL to confirm their particulars and it is not enshrined in the law. Second, the erroneous advice seemed intended to give effect to a thus far failed court attempt by lawyers for the government to establish a residency requirement for voters which had earlier been ruled against by the Chief Justice. The fallacious advice was subsequently withdrawn but that is not good enough. Who instructed the advice to be issued? Whoever that person was he or she should be sanctioned and should not be further involved in the electoral process. GECOM must investigate this matter and issue its findings. GECOM should also attempt to determine what is driving these excursions at sowing confusion and root this out.

Enter Justice (retired) Claudette Singh. In her previous career on the bench, Justice Singh famously presided over the Esther Perreira election petition case which had at its core the contention that the 1997 general elections were so flawed that the results should be overturned. The results of the elections were eventually vitiated on the ground, not that there were major flaws in the elections, but that the use of a voter card which had been agreed by both of the major parties was unconstitutional. Justice Singh is therefore aware of the safeguards for free and fair election, the areas of weakness and what must be done to preserve confidence in the electoral system. She must not shrink from taking decisive action as chair to ensure the integrity of the process and to hold those within the

elections machinery accountable for any shenanigans. History will not judge her kindly if she fails to do the job assigned to her.

Justice Singh would also be well aware that Guyana has had a sordid history of rigged elections between 1968 and 1985 and that this has bequeathed a legacy of distrust, anxiety and fear about general elections. The only way that such concerns could be mitigated is for GECOM to be fully transparent and open about its operations. GECOM is still to publish the prospective schedule of key events leading up to General Elections on March 2 so that members of the public could be fully aware and involved.

GECOM must also accept offers of help from institutions that have over the years supported the electoral process here such as the United Nations (UN), the Commonwealth and the Organisation of American States. Under the former GECOM Chairman, Justice Patterson, the UN had been given the runaround in their offer of assistance. The Commonwealth is also now awaiting feedback from GECOM on its offer of support. It was GECOM in February 2018 which had written to the UN Resident Coordinator here requesting assistance for the 2018 local government elections and general

elections in 2020. That request covered information technology assistance. Why would GECOM now balk at this?

It behoves Justice Singh and her commissioners to ensure that all the help offered by these institutions and friendly countries is taken on board as this will nurture confidence in the electoral process and help to guarantee free and fair elections.

Observing of the polls on March 2nd by local and international groups will also be pivotal in boosting confidence among voters. GECOM must ensure that the requisite arrangements are made for established monitoring groups such as the Commonwealth. Any doubt in the international community about the fairness of general elections on March 2nd can have unpleasant repercussions for the country. Justice Singh and her commissioners are no doubt aware of this.