…Alexander says in giving clarity to the matter
CONTRARY to positions held by the People’s Progressive Party (PPP/C) and opposition-nominated commissioners, Commissioner Vincent Alexander of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) has stated that the national recount is not based on the Representation of the People Act.
Alexander provided clarity on the matter on Saturday—Day Four of the recount —- even as the opposition has been arguing against the need to address discrepancies in ballot boxes and for a simple numerical recount.
On Friday, opposition-nominated Commissioner Sase Gunraj cited Section 89(2) of the Representation of the People Act, stating that: “…in a recount, there is no need to examine several documents.”
However, Alexander said the next day that the recount is not one originating from the Representation of the People Act as the Act took the commission only up to recounts requested by individual regions in the early days after the March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections.
The commissioner explained that the GECOM has moved beyond this point to Article 162 of the Constitution, which gives the commission wide powers to give instructions pertaining to matters it has to direct. The commission has also moved on to Section 22 of the Elections (Amendment) Act which gives GECOM powers to deal with difficulties.
“In that context, with those two provisions which themselves do not specify the count, nor do they specify how the count is done, it’s left up to GECOM to craft how this recount will be in the current circumstance,” Alexander said.
He stated further that GECOM has crafted an outline on how this recount must be conducted which was solidified by an Order — another legal document — which has its foundation in the Constitution and Section 22 of the Elections (Amendment) Act.
He said that while some of the things that the Order permits can be found in Sections 83, 84, 87 and 89 of the Representation of the People Act, they have not been placed in the Order because of those sections, but because they represent actions the commission wishes to take.
Alexander gave the example that the Order deliberately made no reference to Section 89(2) of the Representation of the People Act, because it prohibits the opening of an envelope that contains the Official List of Electors in a normal recount. Given the fact that the commission has long decided that it will embark on more than just a numerical count but a “credible count”, utilising its range of powers, the commission did not specify the same in its Oder as required.
This, he said, is in keeping with the commission’s decision and understanding that the process is not one originating through the Representation of the People Act.
The commissioner said: “We did specify in our Order the contrary, that in fact, we will refer to a balancing of numbers. So, one has to balance, for example, the number of people who crossed off [on the Official List of Electors/pink list] with the number of ballots in the box…except that in the box you may add ballots for people who came with certificates of employment and in that instance their names are written on the OLE.”
The adding of names also caters to the intermixing of ballots from the disciplined services. Altogether, such provisions for the commission to keep an eye out for such irregularities returns to the concept of a “credible count”.
On Friday evening, Commissioner Gunraj engaged in a heated objection with a reporter on the said matter. He maintained that the Representation of the People Act should be used as a guide for the process.
The Order gazetted thereby allowing the commencement of the recount, states: “And whereas the Guyana Elections Commission seeks resource [sic]in Section 22 of the Election Laws (Amendment) Act No 15 of 2000, to remove difficulties connected with the application of the Representation of the People Act, Chapter 1:03 in implementing its decisions relating to the conduct of the aforementioned recount of all ballots cast at the said elections, including the reconciliation of the ballots issued with the ballots cast, destroyed, spoiled, stamped, and as deemed necessary, their counterfoils/stubs; authenticity of the ballots and the number of voters listed and crossed out as having voted; the number of votes cast without ID cards; the number of proxies issued and the number utilised; statistical anomalies; occurrences recorded in the poll book.”
When repeatedly pressed by the media on his position on the matter in contrast with the Order, Gunraj became heated once again and made final remarks as he stated that he would not speak further on the matter.
“The absence of the Official List of Electors in the box, I believe, does not hinder the process. What is required is for the votes that are in there to be counted,” he said. “If there is no OLE in the box, you write it in the Observation Report, plain and simple, move on!”
APNU+AFC Leaders have questioned the PPP/C’s resistance to the highlighting of anomalies and inconsistencies in ballot boxes, noting that a transparent process of a credible recount should be in the interest of all political parties.
The PPP/C has instead labelled the highlighting of such inconsistencies as a delaying tactic and a “waste of time.”
Meanwhile, Alexander has recommended that GECOM establish a “research arm” which engages in examining matters, figures and comparisons after every election to better inform future processes.
He said that such information can also inform the nation of the pattern of voting in Guyana over time, the level of efficiency of polling-day staff and to what extent the elections contribute to democracy.
“We need to do research in an effort to discern if there are problems that we need to resolve, both at the level of GECOM and beyond GECOM,” he said.
Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_05_11_2020