EU castigates GECOM’s fractured legislative framework

…is particularly voluminous, fragmented and unclear

A European-led Observer Mission to Guyana for its 2020 General and Regional Elections has lambasted the country’s fractured electoral legislative framework which does not ensure any legal certainty or transparency.

The observation was made by Mission Head, Umras Paet, who on Wednesday, gave the EU’s preliminary assessment of the 2020 poll and said while Guyana has committed itself to core conventions and declarations pertaining to the conduct of democratic elections, there is no harmonisation of the legal framework with international treaties undertaken.
He was adamant that fundamental freedoms necessary for exercising electoral rights are generally respected and that no effective protection of human rights is available as any possible enforcement or judicial review of human rights must be addressed through a Human Rights Commission and its respective tribunal.
Both, he reminded, are legally provided for since 2001, but not yet established.
Turning his attention directly to the legal framework, Paet said while there is provision for a reasonable basis for competitive elections, it does not ensure legal certainty and transparency, and it is not easily accessible.
According to the EU Mission Head, Guyana’s electoral laws are particularly voluminous, fragmented and unclear.
It was noted that the detailed provisions in the Constitution are expanded by several electoral laws with multiple amendments that reference and amend each other without being consolidated, creating significant inconsistencies.
Election laws must also be read in conjunction with court judgements, according to Paet, but conceded these are not always published or easily available.
Key legislation includes the Constitution, the Representation of the People Act, the National Registration Act and the Elections Laws Act (1996).
The three acts are amended by the election laws and by the Local Democratic Organs Act.
The framework is further supplemented by other acts, most notably the National Assembly (Validity of Elections) Act and GECOM orders and notices.
It was also noted that legally, GECOM has a right to issue directions and instructions orally but most of its internal regulations are not publicly available, further limiting accessibility and transparency.
The EU in its report said identified shortcomings include unregulated registration and operations of political parties, very limited regulation of campaign finance, lack of provisions prohibiting misuse of State resources, lack of opportunity for prisoners and detainees to vote, no guarantee for women’s representation in the National Assembly and no possibility to stand as an independent candidate.
It was observed too that GECOM has not established any formal complaint mechanism and the electoral dispute resolution is available only via judicial dispensation.
As such, all election-related disputes must be raised only after the elections by way of election petitions to the court with a possibility of further appeal.
Paet told media operatives while there is a reasonable time frame of 28 days after the formal publication of results within which post-election petitions about results and candidate qualifications can be filed, there are no timelines for rendering decisions and, therefore, the right to effective remedy is not ensured.