THE Guyana Elections Commission’s independence to exercise its constitutional mandate has once again been asserted in the recent High Court case concerning Ullita Moore v The Guyana Elections Commission, the Chairman of GECOM and others. The case was brought by Moore who had sought an injunction blocking a CARICOM-led national recount set to commence a number of weeks back when an application was filed contending that GECOM cannot order a recount based on the Aide Memoire signed by President David Granger and Leader of the Opposition, Bharrat Jagdeo.

Over a month has passed since the March 2 Regional and General Elections and no final result has been declared or President sworn in. The current political impasse is unprecedented in Guyanese history and continues to unfold in the courts as contesting parties and stakeholders relentlessly pursue their respective agendas.

Guyanese citizens have been frustrated as the litigious meanderings of the contesting parties have severely restricted GECOM’s ability to conclude the elections process in a timely manner. Justice Claudette Singh (Ret’d), Chairman of GECOM, has argued through her legal counsel that with or without the Aide Memoire, GECOM, under the Constitution, has the power to order a national recount of all votes if it found that the electoral process had been compromised. Legal counsel for GECOM referenced a number of established precedents, including the Joseph Hamilton v Guyana Elections Commission, Bharrat Jagdeo & AG (2001) where, then Chief Justice, Desiree Bernard, asserted that “the role of the elections commission and its staff is to take such action as appears necessary to ensure impartiality, fairness and compliance with the provisions of the Constitution and any other acts of Parliament. In the present volatile situation, which pervades our country, [no] effort must be spared to assure everyone that the process [is] fair and impartial. Lingering doubts that hang like a Sword of Damocles over the head of the commission must be removed. Confidence in the electoral process must be restored. This is absolutely essential if we, as a nation, are to move forward and strive to heal the wounds that divide us.” The firm Chief Justice’s words remain as pertinent as ever, nearly two decades later.
Subsequently, the Full Court; consisting of Chief Justice (ag) Roxane George-Wiltshire and Justice Nareshwar Harnanan, ruled that the court has no jurisdiction to review GECOM’s actions outside of an elections petition and not by Judicial Review, as outlined in relevant constitutional and electoral laws. Within hours of the ruling, Moore filed an appeal to challenge the decision of the Full Court.

On Sunday, the Court of Appeal ruled in the Ullita Moore case. The court held that it is unconstitutional and unlawful for CARICOM to supervise GECOM in a national recount of the March 2, Regional and General Elections. Justice Dawn Gregory stated that “Any arrangement or agreement to relinquish supervision of any aspect of the elections, whether the recount or any other aspect – any arrangement to relinquish that supervision and authority – would be an unlawful arrangement. GECOM must, at all times, remain the body constitutionally mandated to supervise [elections]”.

The ruling comes amid a protracted legal battle between the contesting parties with President Granger coming under intense international criticism should he be sworn-in as a result of the previously-declared results, which saw the coalition government securing a second term in office. Criticism withstanding, President Granger has always maintained that GECOM is the authority on elections matters and that he remains confident in its ability to facilitate free, fair and credible elections. The President has always maintained this position throughout the elections impasse.

Following the decision of the Full Court, GECOM has since confirmed its intention and has agreed to a recount of ballots cast in all 10 administrative regions on the March 2 Regional and General Elections. Though many have been anxious for the ballots cast in Region Four to be recounted, instead, GECOM has confirmed that the recount will be done in chronological order and not beginning with Region Four, as many had hoped.

Nonetheless, we have endured an unacceptable delay since ballots were cast and results declared. Over a month has passed since Guyanese stood in line to elect a leader and we have not been vindicated. The recount, as now promised by GECOM, must be flawlessly executed under the watchful eyes of the Guyanese public. All contesting parties and stakeholders must reaffirm their commitment to safeguarding our democratic principles and most importantly, must not interfere with GECOM’s ability to lawfully execute its mandate.