TIGI calls for new formula to select GECOM Chair

…slams President’s move to unilaterally appoint Patterson

 “It is not a progressive step for Guyana, both with respect to democratic principles and accountability, and it has created a precedent that will be convenient when it is and inconvenient when it is not” – TIGI

Local transparency watchdog Transparency Institute of Guyana Inc (TIGI) has said that the time has come for a new formula to be crafted for the appointment of a Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) chairperson, something it believes should have been done long before now.

Speaking about the highly-contentious issue, the organisation said on Monday that this call has existed for many years since the formula was first applied and replaced. The TIGI reminded that the formula was agreed for single use only and noted that it now required all parties to work together.
However, the TIGI did not spare the Government from the heavy criticism it continues to get on the unilateral appointment of retired Justice James Patterson as Chairman of GECOM.
The organisation believes President David Granger should justify his rejection of the nominees in the three lists submitted by Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo and give reasons for his decision. “It is not a progressive step for Guyana, both with respect to democratic principles and accountability, and it has created a precedent that will be convenient when it is and inconvenient when it is not,” TIGI said.
The organisation firmly stated that there should be no room for the unilateral appointment of the GECOM Chair. However, while acknowledging that the Constitution caters for this, the TIGI said it was unfortunate and it was something that should be changed. The body believes when there is a disagreement over the unilateral appointment of a GECOM chair, recourse to the court ought to be sought.
“The decision by the President to proceed with his particular interpretation of the Constitution opens his decision to the charge that he has rejected a list or lists in order to make a unilateral appointment,” the TIGI statement added, noting that having no explanation set a dangerous precedent.

Fit and proper
Touching on one of the most burning issues in the entire debate, the TIGI said the “fit and proper” requirement or the eligibility criteria for the GECOM Chair is important for transparency. The question as to whether or not only a judge can be chair of GECOM should be clarified.
In attempting to interpret the law, the TIGI pointed out that the Constitution overemphasises on the need for the appointment of someone who is a judge or former judge to the post. “It may seem that judges are exhausted by the first two categories. One can, therefore, argue that the ejusdem generis rule is unnecessary and conclude that “any other fit and proper” was meant to expand eligibility.”
The ruling of the court supports expansion of the eligibility criteria, the TIGI said. Therefore, the organisation is of the firm view that this must be the binding interpretation for everyone, unless it is successfully appealed. The interpretation by which the President, according to the organisation, appears to be on “shaky grounds”, However, it was noted that the President’s interpretation enabled rejection of the lists and ultimately the unilateral appointment of the Chair.
The TIGI said that although many legal experts have voiced their views on the matter, their opinions have differed and some of them have political linkages. “These individuals should understand the sway they hold over citizens and act responsibly, especially given that the stakes are high…the court is the final authority on the interpretation of the law,” the body in its statement added.
Nevertheless, the TIGI said that some areas of the law seem grey. As such, it believes that there is still room for the meaning and intent of the law to be fully clarified by the court, even though a ruling was handed down on the matter by the acting Chief Justice, Roxane George a few months ago.
The Opposition People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) had filed an injunction in the High Court to rescind the appointment on the grounds of unconstitutionality. The injunction is seeking a declaration that Justice Patterson is not qualified to be appointed in provision with Article 161-2 of the Constitution of Guyana.
The injunction is also seeking an order to have the appointment of Justice Patterson as Chairman of GECOM quashed and direct the President to choose a person from the 18 names submitted to him.
The matter will be heard before the Chief Justice on November 16.