@Django posted:The LAW and the different wordings of the two Letters from GECOM ,one on June 16 ,2020 [ for reference ] the recent on July 9 ,2020 requesting the report of the March 2,2020 elections from the CEO.
Burnham 1980 Constitution does have folks going around in circles.
Explanation below ,
Jaipaul Sharma
Chairperson of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), Justice ( Ret'd) Claudette Singh is utilizing Section 18 of the Election Laws Act No 15 of 2000, to DICTATE to the Chief Election Officer on what ADVICE he should provide to the Commission.
Article 177 (2)(b)....Presidential candidate shall be DEEMED to be elected as President and shall be so declared by the Chairman of the Elections Commission ACTING ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ADVICE OF THE CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER, after such advice has been tendered to the Elections Commission at a duly summoned meeting.
Based on Article Article 177 (2)(b) it is clear as day that Madame Chair CANNOT DICTATE to the Chief Election Officer as to what ADVICE must be provided to the Elections Commission, as such the action of Madame Chair based on the Gazetted Order is inconsistent with the Constitution of Guyana and therefore to the extent of the inconsistency is VOID.
NO other Officer of the Elections Commission can provide such ADVICE to the Elections Commission other than a substantive Chief Election Officer.
Article 177 (2)(b) is indeed clear that the advice from the Chief Election Officer to the Chairman of GECOM must comply with the specific laws and process of the matter in hand.
The matter specifically relates to the election result by the Statements of Recount --SORs-- copies of which were provided to each political group and the original ones are with GECOM.
While all political groups know the results because of the SORs, it is GECOM that officially declares the results.
Hence, the information to be presented by Keith Lowenfield to GECOM's must coincide with the SORs presented to each political group.