GUYANA is now experiencing what can be described as its most contradictory phase of its modern political life, in terms of long-held and time-honoured principles of governance, being threatened by the politics of dangerous convenience.

Of course, it is quite clear that this would have emanated from the background of the no-confidence motion, intended to remove the David Granger-led coalition, A Partnership for National Unity+ Alliance for Change (APNU+AFC) government.

And since the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) has just given its final verdict in this seminal constitutional matter that has set the stage for national and regional elections, inevitably the spotlight must now be on the preparations for national elections, particularly as to the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) role in this most important of constitutional exercises.

First, it must be reminded, particularly to those who have since been seeking to change the mandate of this key constitutional body, that it is the only designated institution that is tasked with the sole responsibility of preparation and conduct of the national franchise.

Second, it is only when this electoral body is satisfied that all systems are in place, then it can duly make such a pronouncement, by way of informing the Head/State/Government as to its readiness. The latter will then inform the nation, and in the process, make the proclamation for a date on which the nation fulfils this important right. Of course, Parliament will be dissolved.

However, it is the proper preparedness of a particular process – a transparent voter’s list– that must usher in the exercise of the electoral process which is now the subject of what is definable attempts to subvert its proper creation. Unless for those with political amnesia, it is well known that a properly prepared voters’ list is key to the exercise of national elections that are transparent, credible, free and fair. And this is in accordance with the National Registration Act.

It is the sine qua non of every democratic state, since it ensures the right of citizens to become the most integral part of the electoral process, enabling them to choose the government of their choice. But such an above-board voters’ list can only be deemed as credible if it is subjected to a periodic sanitisation exercise, of every seven years, in Guyana’s instance, that will not only remove citizens who have become deceased, but also those who would have migrated between electoral exercises, or out of the jurisdiction. This extends crucially to the even more important fact that it will also afford the proper registration of particularly those citizens who had never been registered prior, for such a national franchise process.

It is known that a defected voters’ list – one that is not cleansed, is the type that is descriptively padded, and corrupted, and is a recipe for electoral malpractice, such as multiple voting. This has been the cause of social unrest in other states where such electoral rascality would have been challenged by democratically-minded citizens.
Also, for any electoral list that does not include would-be eligible voters, especially those participating in their country’s electoral process for the first time, amounts to an unfair denial of a very important human right–their right of choice.

There are those who, for political expediency and sinister motives, are frantically seeking to thwart the democratic aspirations of not only those thousands of young Guyanese, especially those who have attained the age of franchise eligibility, but which, if allowed to occur, would be a grave travesty of justice to this major category in whose hands the future of this nation belong.

It befuddles the mind, up till now one of the greatest acts of national hypocrisy, for many of those whose voices have been loudest in their daily talk about upholding the rights of young people, and preparing them for leadership positions, to now be determined in denying this key segment such a sacred right of participation in the electoral process of their beloved country, by exclusion from national registration.

The same line of rational reasoning must also be applied to those who have been known through the decades to sermonise about the need for electoral transparency, not to be aware that it is only a properly prepared electoral list that can deliver free and fair elections, which must not be disputed when final results are declared. This is the process which the coalition government is determined to ensure.