PRESSURE is mounting on Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo to submit a new list of nominees for the position of Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), amid a chorus of influential voices roundly rejecting his first choices. Jagdeo had named Rhyaan Shah, a constroversial Indian rights activist; Professor James Rose; Lawrence Lachmansingh, a Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Consultant; business executive, Ramesh Dookhoo; former Chairman of the Private Sector Commission, Norman McLean; and Chartered Accountant, Christopher Ram as his nominees, but those names were all rejected by President Granger.

Describing the list as “unacceptable,” President Granger has since explained that the six nominees are not qualified, according to the constitutional requirements.
According to Section 2 of Article 161, “the Chairman of the Elections Commission shall be a person who holds or who has held office as a judge of a court having unlimited jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters in some part of the Commonwealth, or a court having jurisdiction in appeals from any such court or who is qualified to be appointed as any judge, or any other fit and proper person, to be appointed by the President from a list of six persons, not unacceptable to the President, submitted by the Leader of the Opposition after meaningful consultation with the non-governmental political parties represented in the National Assembly.”
Since then, there has been an outpouring of support for President Granger’s decision to reject the list, and overwhelming calls for a new list to be resubmitted.
In a missive, retired Judge of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), Duke Pollard, said that the President’s decision to reject the list was well founded, noting that the intent of Article 161 (2) of the Constitution is to “secure impartiality and even-handedness in the appointment of the Chairman of GECOM.”
“The employment of the pronoun “other” speaks volumes and must be interpreted to mean that such “other fit and proper person” must possess the characteristics of the two-named preceding persons. In effect, such person must possess the generally accepted distinctive characteristics of a judge, namely, autonomy of decision-making, considerable jurisdictional reach, impartiality, integrity and the disposition to act judicially,” Justice Pollard said, as he cleared the air on whether an individual who is not a judge can be appointed Chairman of GECOM.
In assessment of the qualifications of the six nominees, Justice Pollard posited that “The list submitted is palpably defective in omitting persons qualified as judges or possessing requisite qualifications to be appointed as such.”

In a letter on Wednesday, Guyana’s renowned Trade Unionist Lincoln Lewis said Justice Pollard’s interpretation of Article 161 (2) of the Constitution is “timely and most welcomed.” “The input of this gentleman, who served at the Region’s highest court (Caribbean Court of Justice), should be heeded in arriving at a list that President David Granger can find consistent with the extant article to be “not unacceptable to him,” Lewis said.
Elaborating on the statement issued by Justice Pollard, Lewis said in addition to the three categories to be identified, is also what should constitute ‘a fit and proper person.’
He said a person possessing the “characteristics” of a judge or eligible to be a judge is markedly different from possessing certification to be.
“When then President Desmond Hoyte and Minority Leader Cheddi Jagan entered into an agreement defining the procedure for the appointment of a Chairman to GECOM, the names submitted by Jagan to Hoyte reflected an array of persons falling within the three categories. When Hoyte, as Leader of the Opposition, was tasked the responsibility to submit nominees during the Cheddi Jagan and Bharrat Jagdeo presidencies, he did likewise,” the trade unionist recalled as he flipped back the pages of history.

Lewis said given that the formula was tested and proven to be effective resulting in smooth transitions in the past, the procedure outlined in the Constitution should be upheld. President of the Caribbean Guyana Institute for Democracy (CGID), Rickford Burke, had echoed similar sentiments. According to him, any decision by Jagdeo to approach the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) would be insignificant.
“I believe that the powers which Article 161 (a) confer on the President are absolute and innocuous from judicial review. Regardless of any requirement, qualification or eligibility, the constitution mandates that, ultimately, the nominees by the Opposition Leader cannot be ‘unacceptable to the President,’” he emphasised.
According to Burke, Jagdeo may be a little confused about his office; however, he should submit a fresh list. “He’s the opposition leader, not the President. He should quit cavilling and submit a list of nominees that is acceptable to the President.”

Political Commentator David Hinds had also endorsed President Granger’s decision, contending that the Opposition Leader must have known that his list was mostly partisan and flies in the face of the spirit of the Carter Formula.
“The PPP and Mr Jagdeo, when in office, were never put in the position of having to reject outright any list sent to them by the then Opposition, largely because those lists were generally balanced and included persons who were not known to be overtly affiliated with any of the contending parties,” Hinds stated.
He is of the belief that Jagdeo was not thorough enough in his search or with his consultation.
“To find a list of such persons in Guyana, one must do some looking and must approach that search with non-partisan lens,” he posited.
Hinds said the Opposition Leader should do the right thing and resubmit a non-partisan list to the President, following another round of consultations.
“If Mr Jagdeo cares about the integrity of the process, he would initiate a fresh round of consultations…It must include more stakeholder organisations in its consultation; there are a whole range of interests that were not consulted the first time around. I am not aware that Amerindian and African-Guyanese interests were consulted. Also omitted were women’s interest groups, the academic community, youth groups and the full range of religious interests. In the end, both sides must display a sense of fairness and statesmanship—the stakes are too high,” Hinds stated.