Observers overstepped their bounds

Dear Editor,
AS a Guyanese citizen, I must highly commend the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) for a job well done. Indeed, managing elections at the national and the regional levels in a society that is profoundly divided along racial lines such as ours, with a system that is yet imperfect, given its heavy dependence on the human element, is no child’s play. In fact, it is an extremely difficult and treacherous job to get done. Nevertheless, GECOM got it done. Therefore, commendations are in order. Well done GECOM!

That, notwithstanding, there seems to have been certain very worrying issues that appeared to have impinged on the general functionality, work and independence of that Constitutional body (GECOM). I would like to comment briefly on two such issues that continue to titillate my mind: The Verification Process and Returning Officers (ROs), and the purpose of International and Local Observers of our electoral process here, in Guyana. First, as far as I am aware, Returning Officers are empowered to carry out certain functions, including the responsibility to ascertain results from elections held in districts over which they have supervisory powers.

As far as I am aware, too, in ascertaining those results, Returning Officers are not particularly obliged to confer with anyone, apart from those officers who work under their supervision in their respective districts. One must therefore ask the question: What can stakeholders do if they are dissatisfied with results ascertained by ROs? The answer could not be a massive collective increase in decibels while those results are being announced by ROs as has happened on Thursday at the GECOM office. That would result in making the entire process destitute of focus, and in fact, any semblance of good order. Surely, there must be another way of recourse to a practicable resolution.

Second, on the question of observers, it has to be said that all over the world, countries use international and local observers during their elections, particularly for the purpose of improving their electoral processes.

For years, we, in Guyana have cherished and placed great store on the value, [knowledge, experiences, and competencies] Observers bring to the advancement of our electoral process. Nevertheless, it seems quite clear to me, as a Guyanese, that those who have been accredited by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with Observer Status should not attempt to participate in the electoral process beyond observation. If they do, then they run the risk of compromising not only their noble and most valuable status as Observers, but also the entire electoral process activated by GECOM. The purpose of the observers is not to fix the process but to observe and report.

But from reports in certain sections of our local media, it seems to me that the clear and distinct line between observer-status and participators, or participating responsibility, has been troublingly blurred. This manifested itself on Thursday, March 5, 2020 in the crowding of the space of GECOM by some of the Observers. One is left with the serious question on what must be the acceptable distance that should exist between observers and the administration and staff at GECOM.

I wonder if it is normal that observers get so close to the process, to the point where they feel that they can exercise the right to enter into the offices of GECOM officials without being properly invited at such a sensitive time? Or is it usual, in some countries, including the countries of origins of some of the current observers in Guyana for its 2020 elections) for observers to proffer their opinions, seek interventions, and in any way influence electoral processes while the process is in progress? I have not been able to find examples of this behaviour in other countries by observers.

I rather suspect that observers are expected to observe the conduct of elections, and at the conclusion of those processes involved submit their observations and recommendations to the respected and respective authorities to improve the systems, methods and approaches used to conduct free fair and credible elections. I am recommending, not as an observer, but as a Guyanese, that GECOM review the management and security of the space in which it operates.

Regards,
Royston King

Source: https://issuu.com/guyanachroniclee-paper/docs/guyana_chronicle_e-paper_3-7-2020

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *