PNCR, AFC warn against CoI duplicating work of elections court
-back internal GECOM probe
Arguing that the recently announced Commission of Inquiry (CoI) into the 2020 general and regional elections is a duplication of functions of an Elections Court, the main opposition parties have renewed calls for an internal investigation to be conducted by the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM).
On Tuesday, two years after he made the initial commitment, President Irfaan Ali announced the establishment of a CoI into the 2020 elections. The Commission will be headed by retired Trinidad Justice of Appeal Stanley John and includes former Attorney General, High Court Judge and Acting Justice of Appeal in the Eastern Caribbean, Godfrey P. Smith SC; former Chair and Chief Elections Commissioner of India, Dr S. Y. Quraishi; and former Chancellor (Ag), of the Guyana Judiciary, Carl Singh.
On Wednesday, both the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) and the Alliance For Change (AFC) renewed their calls for an internal investigation into its processes by the elections commission and for the CoI not to interfere in the work of the Elections Court.
At a press conference, PNCR executive Gary Best called the CoI a distraction from the current affairs of the country. He argued that it is important for the citizenry not to lose sight of the hearing of the election petitions.
“The PNCR, therefore, reiterates its call for a speedy and unhindered hearing of these election petitions, via the judicial process that is far superior to that of a CoI. Further, there is no need for a parallel nonbinding process that has no judicial finality,” Best said.
He added that the PNCR views the setting up of a CoI as a clear attempt to “hoodwink” the Guyanese public by introducing a process which is of less judicial value than the elections petition. He added that it is important to note that a CoI is not a court of law.
“Our own Commission of Inquiry Act allows for hearsay evidence, it allows for accusations of misconduct being made without any built-in rules of natural justice or procedural fairness to safeguard the rights and interests of people who might be so affected. We have seen this before with previous CoIs.
“In the case of the petition, it is a legal process in which evidence is considered and the decisions of the Court are binding in law and on the parties to it. Obviously, the PPP’s intention is to smear the character and reputation of persons who would be averse to them in the election petitions,” he said.
Best argued that with the governing People’s Progressive Party being a party to the elections petition, the establishment of the CoI is tantamount to contempt for the elections judicial process. He added that since Ali remains adamant to go ahead with the CoI, he should then engage the opposition to determine the terms of reference to reduce potential bias.
When asked if there are legal alternatives to put a pause on the CoI, Best said that there is nothing to prevent such.
“There’s nothing that prevents legal action, nothing technically [that] prevents legal action because you go to the court and the court finally decides whether or not your action was grounded properly or not. I think what is important here is to
recognize that GECOM is the body responsible for conducting elections in Guyana [and] it is that body that should be looking doing an internal review to determine what went wrong with the elections,” he said.
Meanwhile, in a statement, AFC said that the internal review would have identified the flaws and weaknesses in the systems, operations, and human resources of GECOM. It added that system reviews are a natural course for bodies and organisations like GECOM as a means of learning from the areas of weaknesses.
“To shy away from this self-examination was most irresponsible; and, an unnecessary damage to the credibility of an almost shattered GECOM. As regards the Commission of Inquiry now to be established, the AFC notes that it has started off on the wrong footing.
“There ought to have been an attempt at consultation with the Opposition on the
entirety of this matter, inclusive of the constitution of its members, the terms of reference, and the timeline in conducting its work. This consultative, inclusive approach would certainly have engendered a modicum of acceptability and legitimacy of whatever final report it will produce, plus a participation in the Commission’s work by a greater number of Guyanese,” the AFC said.
The AFC added that it is hoping that the Commission does come up with a profound set of recommendations which will ensure that GECOM produces “free, fair, and credible elections in future and that its internal operations, system and human resources be examined thoroughly to identify flaws and weaknesses which it did not want to confront in that internal review.”
It also warned that the CoI should not be used by the government nor the PPP to delay or displace the election petitions current before the court.