Review of current composition of GECOM needed – Caricom team urges

The Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) was never conceptualised as an institution which would exemplify autonomy from partisan political influences given Guyana’s political history. As such, the current composition of the Commission must be looked at going forward, the Caricom high-level team urged.

Currently, the seven-member Commission is appointed on the advice of the President and Leader of the Opposition with each submitting three names each while the Chair of the Commission is then appointed by the President from a list of six persons submitted by the Leader of the Opposition after consultation with other stakeholders. This method of appointment avoids domination by a single political party which is imperative given the nature of politics in the country.
Retired Justice Claudette Singh is the current Chair of GECOM while the A Partnership for National Unity/Alliance For Change (APNU/AFC) Commissioners are Vincent Alexander, Desmond Trotman and Charles Corbin; and the Opposition Commissioners Sase Gunraj, Robeson Benn and Bibi Shadick.

Because of GECOM’s composition, it escapes the problems associated with electoral bodies closely linked with and hierarchically subordinated to elected officials, but it has not been able to operate at arm’s length from partisan politics even while it has been insulated from unnecessary executive meddling associated with those election bodies embedded within a ministry.
GECOM has the power to pass an order wherever it perceives difficulties in carrying out its mandate. However, despite not being subjected to the direction of any government department or to the political executive or Parliament, GECOM is still not a truly independent body because of its very political makeup.
“While GECOM is described as an independent body, it is undoubtedly a political Commission, and herein lies most of the problems, the paralysis, and the factionalism experienced by that body,” the Caricom report stated.
The team found that the various political posturing of the Commissioners in public was on full display during the 2020 elections season and was quite unfortunate in getting the body to function properly. Additionally, the report revealed that the three-member team found that the time was overripe for the restructuring of the Commission.

It went on to highlight that Guyana needs an institution which is capable of managing its relations with all political parties in the country in a balanced fashion. Additionally, the Commission must be able to execute its functions and speak with impartiality.
“Further, given what the team witnessed during the recount process emanating from the Commission, particularly with regard to the ill-advised, nightly often contradictory media statements and posturing of some Commissioners, the disinclination on the part of Commissioners to demonstrate a modicum of independence from the two major political parties, it is clear that a reconstituted Commission buttressed by a code of conduct are urgently required. In a nutshell, the Commission does not act impartially, given the partisan loyalty of the Commissioners,” the report stated.
The team – comprising Sylvester King, Deputy Supervisor of Elections of St Vincent and the Grenadines; Cynthia Barrow-Giles, Senior Lecturer in the Department of Government at the University of the West Indies (UWI) and John Jarvis, Commissioner of the Antigua and Barbuda Electoral Commission – expressed sympathy for the plight of Justice Singh, since she only assumed the post in a relatively short time.
They documented that she shared frustrations of having to walk a thin line between the two dominant political parties, since the risk of being accused of being partisan is great. The team noted that the Chair seemed to be frustrated with the inability of the Commissioners to take affirmative actions and conclude decisions.
It noted that behind the scenes, her arms were constantly being twisted by the relentless manipulation by the Commissioners. They applauded her for her steadfast leadership and commitment to respecting the laws of the land. Without making reference to the political party, the team documented one instance of a political party bombarding Justice Singh with letters alleging irregularities and demanding that decisions be made by the Commission.
That party was the APNU/AFC and its agent was Joseph Harmon.
To better structure the Commission to lead fairly and report situations as is, the team recommended that it was time Guyana revisited GECOM’s system on the basis of its performance.
“We insist that to maintain GECOM in its present form would be a tragedy for the nation and the people of Guyana. GECOM, as we indicated, is a creature of the dominant political parties and there is consequently little interest on the part of Commissioners in ensuring that elections and the electoral environment are conducive to integrity-based elections which will reflect the will of the people,” the Barrow-Giles authored report indicated.
It was noted that the structural composition of the Commission needed to be revisited since representation by the two major political parties simply does not cut it. The current composition leads to unnecessary prolongation of issues and avenues to accuse the Chair of biases.
The team recommended that the Commission’s membership be widened to include one representative of the smaller/minor political parties, a representative of the media, and one person representing each of the social partners, namely business, civil society and trade unions. In this way, the highly-partisan nature of the Commission can be hopefully diluted, permitting a greater level of consensus and forestalling the immobilism and blame game that constantly bedevil the Commission. In so doing, GECOM will quite possibly go a long way to inspire the confidence and trust in its operations and intent that are clearly lacking.
The high-level team said it was alarmed by some of the utterances by GECOM Commissioners resulting in them being complicit in the assault on the legitimacy and independence of the institution they are a part of.
“But what is also unmistakable is that a political audit of GECOM, (its successes and failing and the factors contributing to this), both the Commission and its administrative arm, is urgently warranted. It, therefore, behoves whichever political party emerges victorious from these elections to initiate an immediate political audit, as in a very real sense GECOM betrayed its obligations to behave impartially and independently in the best interest of integrity-based processes which did not favour any party or parties whether in terms of operational or policy decisions,” the report concluded.