…GECOM attorney tells CCJ house to house registration crucial
…AG says govt committed to provide funding

By Svetlana Marshall in Port of Spain

ATTORNEY General Basil Williams assured the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) that funds would be made available to Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) if the court rules that early elections must be held.

But even with that commitment, which is a reflection of a position long declared by President David Granger, GECOM’s Senior Counsel, Stanley Marcus, informed the Court that the Elections Commission could only facilitate General and Regional Elections after October, 2019. Initially, GECOM had indicated that it would respect the decision of the CCJ in the three consolidated appeals challenging the Court of Appeal’s decision that the No-Confidence Motion was of no effect. Those appeals are: Christopher Ram v The Attorney General, the Leader of the Opposition, Joseph Harmon and the Guyana Elections Commission; Bharrat Jagdeo v The Attorney General, the Speaker of the National Assembly, Joseph Harmon and the Guyana Elections Commission; and Charrandass Persaud v Compton Reid, the Speaker of the National Assembly, the Attorney General, Bharrat Jagdeo, Joseph Harmon and the Guyana Elections Commission.

On Thursday, when a panel of five judges led by President of the CCJ, Justice Adrian Saunders commenced hearing oral arguments into the consolidated appeals, GECOM’s Attorney told the Court that the Elections Commission experienced difficulties facilitating General and Regional Elections within the three months’ timeframe laid out in Article 106 (7) of the Constitution.

The attorney informed the Court that the Elections Commission unanimously voted to revise the Official List of Voters through the conduct of National Registration. With the Official List of Voters, expiring on April 30, 2019, the process of House-to-House becomes even more critical.

“I don’t think I have to belabour the point that funding is necessary to administer elections and it was pointed out that having regard to the programme of the elections commission, unanimously decided upon, there was the need for the revision of the list. List for Local Government Elections and General Elections, and the exercise of the commission was to update that List. “…a list that was compiled in 2008 by no stretch of the imagination could be valid for elections in 2018 or 2019,” Marcus told the CCJ judges.

He invited the panel of judges, which also included Justices David Hayton, Winston Anderson, Jacob Wit, Rajnauth-Lee, to take judicial notice of the fact that between 2008 and 2018, there were migration and remigration, deaths, and thousands of persons who became eligible to be a voter. Those factors, he posited, would require a revision of the list – a process the Elections Commission had concluded would take approximately six to nine months.

Justice Saunders, while acknowledging the independence of the Elections Commission, pointed to the fact that the Constitution sets a foundation for elections to be held within three months following a No-Confidence vote.

“It seems to me that the Commission, must at every stage put itself in a position where within a three-month time frame it is able to handle an elections because that is always possible and if that situation were to accord then the normal strategic plan that you had…would have to be adjusted,” Justice Saunders suggested.

In response, the Trinidad-based attorney said that the Commission developed its plan on the basis that General and Regional Elections is due every five years but Justice Saunders said GECOM should be ready for elections in an abnormal situation like a snap elections birthed out of a No-Confidence Motion.

But Marcus turned the judges’ attention to the Constitution for a closer and holistic view. “Article 106 (7) should be read as a whole. We should not emphasise only that aspect that says, elections should be held within three months. The framers of the Constitution envisage that you may have these extra ordinary circumstances and therefore they went on to say, that you must have the elections within three months or at such other time, as the National Assembly may (see it fit by a two-third margin),” the Attorney admonished the court.

According to him, the three months stated in the Constitution is directory and not mandatory or absolute. He said it was expected that maturity would have prevailed in the National Assembly to allow for an extension of what was considered a constitutional timeline before the motion was invalidated by the Appeal Court, but that did not happen. The Parliamentary Opposition had refused to return to the National Assembly to extend the time.

“If you cannot get the Members of the National Assembly to act in a responsible and mature manner to do what is necessary, then you are going to have a constitutional crisis,” he told the Court.

He said the Court must be mindful of the independence and functions of the Elections Commission spelt out in Articles 62 and 162 of the Constitution.

That aside, Marcus said GECOM cannot facilitate elections without the necessary funding. However, he noted that the President and GECOM have been engaging on the matter of funding. Once funding is provided, Marcus assured the Court that elections could be held by November once the process of revising the Official List of Voters is completed.

Williams, during his deliberations, told the judges that in the event the Court rules that early election is required funding will be provided. “The President of Guyana has already given that commitment, and he has given that commitment to the nation, and he has given it specifically to GECOM when they met with the President,” the Attorney General told the Court.

Williams, in rebutting arguments put by Kamal Ramkarran and Devindra Kissoon – the attorneys representing Christopher Ram, the Attorney General said it is known in Guyana that in naming a date for the conduct of elections, the President must be first advised by the elections body. “The practice has always been that you consult GECOM, rather than getting up in the middle of the night and announce a date because what has happened before, names were announced but were not made and it led to a state of national emergency,” the Attorney General explained.

Like Marcus, Williams said the Constitution is clear on the functions of GECOM, the president and the role of political parties in any elections. Notwithstanding the commitment given, the Attorney General asked the court to uphold the decision of the Court of Appeal.

The oral arguments will continue today, with arguments from Senior Counsel Neil Boston and Attorney-at-Law Roydale Forde. Replies would also be made to the arguments put on Thursday. Speaker of the National Assembly, Dr. Barton Scotland, who was present during the arguments, has informed the court through his attorney, Senior Counsel Rafiq Khan that he will respect the decision of the Court.