Public Service Credit Union cancels Special General Meeting over lack of quorum

A lack of quorum led to the dissolution of Monday’s Special General Meeting (SGM) of the Guyana Public Service Cooperative Credit Union (GPSCCU), which could have seen the election of a new executive. In a September 30 ruling, High Court Judge Navindra Singh had ordered the credit union’s Committee of Management (CoM) chaired by Karen Vansluytman-Corbin to hold the SGM no later than Monday, October 24. A notice for the SGM that was recently published in a newspaper stated: “Pursuant to the Co-operatives Societies Act, Cap 88:01, Regulation 16, Notice is hereby given that a Special General Meeting of Members of the Guyana Public Service Co-operative Credit Union Ltd… will be held on Monday, October 24, 2022, in the auditorium of the new Central High School, Princes Street, Georgetown, Guyana at 8:00h.”

But with the majority of the credit union’s 23,000-plus members absent for in-person and online attendance via Zoom, the SGM was declared dissolved by Vansluytman-Corbin for lack of quorum at 09:10h in accordance with the Cooperative Societies Act.
A specific section of the Act stipulates that where a registered society consists of more than 40 members, one-fourth of the total number of the members shall form a quorum for the purposes of the Annual or a Special General Meeting. “Madam Chair, today, we are at the Special General Meeting. According to our annual report for 2020, the [GPSCCU] has 23,033 members; one-fourth being 5758 members. At this time, Madam Chair, our online registration amounts to 96… our in-person registration amounts to 53. The total registration is 149. Our number for a quorum is 5758. So, Madam Chair, at this point, we do not have a quorum,” the credit union’s Secretary Gillian Pollard informed its chairperson at the New Central High School.

What’s next?
Following the dissolution of the SGM, Vansluytman-Corbin told the media that “me and my directors will now engage the members informally. The formal part of the meeting has been dissolved. We will engage them informally so that we can bring them up to date on what has developed.”
Asked about the chances of another SGM being held, she said, “Whoever wishes to bring that, will have to deal with that. We have complied with an order issued by the court and [nothing] was not stopping us from going ahead with this meeting.” The chairperson assured that the interest of the credit union’s members is of paramount importance. It was three of the GPSCCU’s members—Mehalai McAlmont, Keith Marks and Natasha Durant-Clements—who had petitioned the court for the SGM to be held. But with these same members boycotting the meeting, and encouraging others to do the same, Vansluytman-Corbin expressed, “I’m surprised that they are now asking members not to attend the meeting they demanded.” She maintained that all the procedures for the meeting, as directed by the court, have been followed.

Boycott
Last Sunday at a press conference, a 12-member team of candidates led by Trevor Benn announced that they would be boycotting the SGM and urged other members and their supporters to follow suit because plans for the meeting, as they were, violated the court’s order. Even though they were confident of a victory, “Team Trevor Benn” made it clear that they would not partake in the meeting because systems were not in place to guarantee a free, fair, and transparent election. Attorney-at-Law Christopher Thompson, a candidate on the team, said that Justice Singh ordered that preparation for this year’s SGM mirror that of last year’s.
According to him, the following measures were in place for 2021’s meeting: a notice of the SGM was published in five newspapers of national circulation and contained the objective and agenda of the meeting, nomination day for potential holders was advertised and members were allowed to nominate candidates of their choice, polling stations were established in each administrative region, systems for online voting and live streaming of the meeting was done by a reputable company from Trinidad and Tobago, ROSE IT Services and voters’ education materials were also circulated. None of these, however, were in place for Monday’s meeting, he added.
“I want to encourage all the members and supporters of Team Benn to be patient, to avoid any confrontation, and stay away from the meeting. We have been advised by our lawyers that it is in our best interest not to participate in this process. We will be making contact with you about the way forward. We will want the Judge’s instructions to be followed. As it is, what they are about to embark on, does not comply with the Judge’s order so even if they call it a Special General Meeting, even if they went ahead and do what they have to do, it will not meet the requirements of the Judge and we are confident that Judge is not going to allow that to stand—whatever they do tomorrow [Monday],” Benn, who is running for Chairman, said on Sunday.

How is the CoM flouting the court order?
“The notice of the SGM was published in a single newspaper. The object and the agenda of that meeting were not included in the notice. No nomination day for the potential office bearers was advertised or held and therefore members are going into a Special General Meeting without having a clue about who is vying for office,” Thompson explained at Sunday’s press conference.

“We have not heard of and there has not been established any polling stations for voting outside of Region Four. Members in the other regions who are interested in voting will have to make the trek all the way down to Georgetown in order to cast their vote in person. More importantly, 20,000-plus members of the credit union are being given a maximum of two hours to register to vote online virtually…from 07:00h to 09:00h… the credible IT service provider will not be conducting the online voting and live streaming,” added the attorney-at-law.
Besides the foregoing, Benn said that members were unaware of who is the Returning Officer, and who will be counting their votes. It is understood that the current CoM has applied for a variation of the court order for the hiring of another IT provider to which “Team Trevor Benn” has objected. That matter comes up for a hearing on November 7 before Justice Singh. Further, Benn informed that members had no confidence in the online service provider contracted by the CoM “since we have no track record of that company”. In light of this, the lawyer noted, “There is total disobeying of the court order”. Since none of these systems are in place, the team believed that the SGM could not have been held on Monday and not until all the Judge’s orders are complied with.

Contempt of court
During a press conference last week, Thompson said he “rather suspects” this is the first time the court has sanctioned an SGM, adding, “I would want to believe that the current Committee of Management may be unaware of their liability for contempt of court proceedings if this court order is not followed to the letter…”
According to him, this is not a regular members’ sanctioned meeting but rather a direct order of the court that has to be complied with. Non-compliance with the order of a court, he pointed out, will result in contempt of court proceedings against the CoM.
In the days leading up to the SGM, the GPSCCU, via its Facebook page, posted among other things, several notices detailing the procedure for online/in-person registration, participation and voting, as well as the Zoom link for the meeting. (G1)