Dear Editor,
The Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) is correctly being bombarded internationally and on the local front with respect to the unclear approach used to select temporary and permanent staff.
This in addition to President Granger’s recent disclosure that the tried and proved ‘Carter Formula’ has lost its relevance is a conjured assassination plot on democracy and the freedoms of all Guyanese.
The endless criticisms have been justified and merited, especially from the perspective of the apparent lack of concern being displayed by the leaders of the organisation. These have been prejudicial at best, and strongly in conflict with the neutrality mechanisms in place to discharge the intended responsibilities, roles and functions of the organisation.
As the entity responsible for the administration and conduct of elections in Guyana, the constitutional obligation and core role of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) in the execution of its functions is to act with impartiality and fairness in the execution of its duties under Section (162 (1) [b], Constitution (Amendment) Act).
It is not as if GECOM has been without many known problems which are still expected to be remedied; there are indeed many. Further, the concerns have become more glaring based on the links with, as well as the relationship of, persons internal and external to the organisation who are culpable of fraudulent operational practices. Their influence over, and connection with, election works and results affirm that the likes of such elements MUST be permanently divorced from any functional or oversight activity of the commission.
The Auditor General’s recent report bears rich testimony to excessive and indecent practices by some involved in GECOM’s works. What complicates matters further, and creates an untrustworthy conundrum, is the almost immediate posture taken by the new Chairman of the Commission in the face of much public complaints and evidence from the reports of the Auditor General.
In fact, since the imposition of Justice (R’td) James Patterson as Chairman of GECOM, the nation is yet to witness any meaningful approach to create or encourage any firm balance and neutral stance required to realise and set at ease the associated concerns. On the contrary, there have been praises emanating from the Chairman of the performances of the incumbent persons, which almost further challenges the Auditor General to take additional independent actions.
The threats to the nation are therefore being amplified under the outlined framework, which also defeats the constitutional intent of having a chairman for the institution who has the “qualities of, or has been, a Judge”.
Had it not been for other extant counter-measures, such as counting the votes at the places of poll, the current approach and signals would suggest in-chamber decisions being made even before the first vote is cast, or witness called.
President Granger, after having reneged on the customary approach of selecting the Chairman of GECOM, has now become the leading advocate against the use of the ‘Carter Formula,’ which essentially brought democracy to this country. The methods have been acceptable, agreed and constitutionally enshrined approach for the regulation of elections for over 25 years.
The recommended changes in the composition and method of selection of the members of the Elections Commission are another deflection; bent on distracting the necessary and required focus of addressing other critical and problematic areas.
The suggestion that related selection issues can be treated similar to other constitutional commissions lends the establishment of a ‘paper tiger’ position similar to the treatment given by this Government to other commissions. Full autonomy and no less equal balance than is offered by the current Carter Charter must be a determinant.
One cannot help but observe that there is now a trend emerging from the Coalition Leadership of imposing on citizens many legally challengeable decisions.
Sincerely,
Neil Kumar