Nigel Hughes, Stanlev Ming sav int’I observers should not be esteemed aver CARI COM
…chide foreigners tar premature statements
By Lisa Hamilton
PROMINENT attorney-at-Law, Nigel Hughes and established businessman, Stanley Ming, have weighed in on the involvement of international observers in Guyana’s electoral situation, noting that some actions have been premature while others seem to underestimate the role of CARICOM.
Appearing as guests on Bensch op Radio I 07. I FM on Thursday night, the men were asked to speak on Guyana’s most engaging current affairs, the national recount, and the involvement of groups such as the Organisation of the American States (OAS) and the Caner Center.
AGAINST ESTABLISHED TREATIES
Hughes first made it clear that international absenters have the right to perform their roles which are to observe the electoral process and report on any perceived irregularities, misconduct or anything that goes against local and international standards.
However, in his examination of the treaties and conventions which guide observers, he said that he has not seen any provision for them make pronouncements prior to the presentation of their reports. Hughes comments come as Bruce Golding, former Prime Minister of Jamaica and head of the OAS Observer Mission to Guyana for the March elections, only eight days into the national recounts claimed that there was a “transparent effort to alter the results of the elections based on information from only 20 ballot boxes from Region Four.
Though noting that he is not an electoral expert, Hughes stated: “The second a person takes a position before the conclusion of the event that they are observing means that they would not have had the benefit of the full conduct of that event in this case the election to be able to offer a conclusive position having observed all of the activities that have transpired.”
He later added: “So, if Mr. Golding’s actions which they appear to be would have come before the OAS would have actually produced a final report, then I think perhaps that his actions may he precipitated and clearly don’t form part of the final report and certainly seems to be beyond the protocols there ,established for observing.”
HASTY CONCLUSIONS
Meanwhile, Ming agreed that Golding’s actions were hasty and pointed to the 2019 Ecuador elections which he claimed the OAS wrongfully pronounced upon without having all the information and were “proved wrong”.
Shifting then to the matter of the perceived impartiality of certain observer missions in Guyana, giving his advice, the attorney said that even if this is the perception, it would be expected that an observer mission would consider pursuing a path that does not add to any existing concerns.
He said that it is important that, if Guyanese are to benefit from the process, those who art tasked with providing an end report arc perceived by all sides, to have some level of equanimity and fairness.
NO HIGHER STATUS
The men also spoke to the involvement of the Carter Center. lo a statement on Thursday, the centre said that it is “deeply disappointed” with its exclusion from Guyana’s national recount process and believes that “genuine commitment to transparency” is hampered by its absence.
It had plans of fielding a two-member team to the country earlier in the month but the government denied the same citing CARICOM as “the most legitimate interlocutors in the Guyana situation,” and, he COVID-19 pandemic.
The centre said that while it acknowledges the value of CARICOM and other obserers to the process, it feels as if its work, as an accredited observer, has been stymied due to its re-entry restriction to the country. The matter also goes into context with the earlier remarks of United States (U.S.) Ambassador to Guyana, Sarah-Ann Lynch, chat the involvement of the Carter Center is necessary for Guyanese to have “complete confidence that their elections were free, fair and credible.
Weighing in, Ming stated said that he is aware of the useful involvement of the Carter Center in Guyana ·s past elections but nothing, in his opinion, would be different should they be absent from the current recount process, given the presence of CARI COM. you don’t need anybody more than what we have from the Caribbean. I think our Caribbean brothers and sisters are competent as any and in some cases even more. And why I say more, [is] not because they’re more intelligent, but they know the culture of the Caribbean, they know how we behave,” he put forward.
“‘We don’t need the Caner Center or the OAS or anybody, people from the Caribbean are capable enough.” Continuing on the topic, Hughes said that he does not believe that greater importance should be given 😮 one observer mission over another as all reports coming out of the elections process, by well-standing stakeholders, matter.
“The Carter Center is one of several observers and I am not sure, in the absence of seeing the report of all the observers, that one can say greater weight ought to be placed on a report from the Carter Center as opposed to a report from CARJCOM, as opposed to a report from one of the ‘political parties, as oppose J to even if we had a domestic observer mission. I’m not sure that one can say that the Carter Center, because they have a more prominent leader in the person of President (Jimmy Carter, their report is entitled to any greater weight or consideration he opined.
He said that unless there is some compelling capacity” that the Carter Center has above the CARICOM scrutinising team sent under the auspices of CARICOM Chair, President Mia Mottley — their reports will be as credible as any other.
A SOVEREIGN ST A TE
As it relates to the government’s denial of re-entry of the Carter Center to the country, Hughes reminded that many Guyanese stranded overseas have been unable lo return because of the existing travel ban due to COVID-19.
He said that, in allowing reentry into the country of any group of persons, the government must have considered the comparativeness of re-entry for its citizens and the re-entry of two observers. In its final decision, he said that the government must have also considered the public relations consequence of making such a decision. Even so, he said the fact remains that the government of Guyana, by law, has the right to make such decisions, especially in times of crisis, in the interest of its people.
the responsibility and the Executive p government of a
sovereign state — the leader – has the responsibility for determining what is in the best interest for the safety, protection and health of the citizenry. If, particularly, in an unprecedented crisis like we have now, they have ad e opted certain health requirements … then one would expect that whatever the sovereign state, through its Executive, has put in place will be observed by anybody who is going to come to the country,” Hughes explained, adding:
“I certainly don’t think that an exception should be made merely because a person wants to come back to observe an elections and you ‘re not allowing your own nationals to return, because that has its own problems.”
During the interview, Ming also made a strong pitch for Constitutional reform noting that the promise has been too far delayed by both major political parties. His position pa is that its absence has been the “recipe and the downfall of Guyana”.
Meanwhile, though Hughes supports the call for Constitutional reform, he noted that that population may need additional education on the matter as though such reforms remain important, the majority of supports seem to have been made comfortable with a winner-take-all system.
Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_epaper_23_05_2020