The Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission, Retired Justice Claudette Singh on Tuesday instructed the Chief Elections Officer, Keith Lowenfiel to use of tabulated matrices from the national vote recount, effectively clearing the way for People’s Progressive Party (PPP) presidential candidate, Irfaan Ali to be sworn in as the next president.

GECOM issued the following statement:

– After considerable deliberations at the Commission on the report submitted by
Chief Election Officer (CEO), Mr. Keith Lowenfield on the National Recount of votes cast in the 2nd March, 2020
General and Regional Elections, Chairperson of the Commission, Justice Claudette Singh has requested for the
CEO prepare a report to ascertain the results of the elections under Section 96 of the Representation of the People
Act, Chapter 1:03 and in keeping with Order No. 60 of 2020 and its addendum dated 29th May, 2020.

In her decision to the Commission on 16th June, 2020, Justice Singh asserted that the Commission does not have
the powers of a Court of Law to examine and re-examine witnesses or to procure official documents to determine
the truth of the allegations contained therein.

The Chairperson posited that she is of the opinion that some of the allegations are of a serious nature and must be
addressed. However, Article 163 (1) (b) of the Constitution confers on the High Court the exclusive jurisdiction to
determine the validity of an election.

She explained that in order to give itself the authority to conduct the national recount, GECOM resorted to Article
162 (1) (b) of the Constitution to take such action as appear necessary or expedient to ensure impartiality and
fairness.

In this regard, GECOM could not have thereby clothed itself with jurisdiction to establish itself as a Court of Law to
determine credibility of an election when Article 163 (1) stipulates that the High Court shall have exclusive jurisdiction to determine the legality of an election.

Justice Singh also noted that the Commission cannot arrogate onto itself a jurisdiction to annul an election since no
specific power was conferred on it under Article 162 (1) (b). A perusal of Articles 162 and 163 of the Constitution
shows that the Articles clearly and sharply separate the functions of GECOM and the High Court respectively in
matters of electoral process.

In delivering the landmark decision to the Commission, Justice Singh referenced Article 163(1)(b) then Article 71
(1)(b) of the 1996 Constitution which received judicial consideration in the case of Gladys Petrie v. Attorney
General (1968) GLR 504 at 519 Bollers CJ. It stated the question which the court had to consider under this Article.