A bloated list provides an opportunity to rig the vote.  The unconstitutionality of removing voters from the bloated list is an interesting one.  The claims and objections process will do nothing to remove registered voters resident abroad as the Courts have ruled that they cannot be removed.  This means that Guyanese resident abroad have the right to vote in Guyana but they have to go to Guyana to do so.  This is an anomaly.  If one has the right to vote then s/he should be able to do so irrespective of where domiciled.  In the meanwhile the bloated list continues to be an opportunity for rigging. 

AG Nandlall calls on GECOM to “educate” Opposition Leader on voters’ list

…says Norton seems not to know changes can only be made by GECOM

Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister Anil Nandlall, SC, wants the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) to thoroughly clarify to the public that it cannot remove the names of persons from the voters’ list at the whims of the A Partnership for National Unity/Alliance For Change (APNU/AFC) Opposition.

Nandlall’s calls came on the heels of Opposition Leader Aubrey Norton saying during a recent press conference that he would continue to put pressure on the Government to clean the voters’ list, which he has been maintaining is “bloated”.

But, according to the Attorney General, it is GECOM, and not the Government of Guyana, that is responsible for compiling and maintaining the list of electors.

“This gentleman, up to now, seems not to be able to grasp that the Government of Guyana has nothing to do with a list of electors, [and] that the Constitution of Guyana establishes an agency called the Guyana Elections Commission, and it vests in that agency the exclusive powers and responsibilities to [hold elections for] which preparation includes the compilation of the list of electors in accordance with the Constitution and the Laws of Guyana. The Government has nothing to do with that.

Attorney General & Legal Affairs Minister Anil Nandlall, SC

“[Norton] seems to want unconstitutionality to take place in relation to that list, and whenever he makes those wild, reckless and unfounded allegations about unlawfulness of the list, then the Government, being a stakeholder, is entitled to speak,” Nandlall contended during his weekly programme – Issues In The News.

Against this backdrop, the Attorney General called on the Elections Commission to address the issue of removing names from the voters’ list so that both Norton and the public can understand that it is unconstitutional.

“I am using this platform to call upon GECOM to speak about the list, and to inform Mr Norton and the public that there is a ruling from the Chief Justice [Roxane George] while Mr Norton’s party was in Government, when GECOM, under an illegal Chairman appointed by President [at the time David] Granger, was attempting to remove persons from the list who are already registered…

“We took proceedings to the court, and the Chief Justice pronounced that it is unlawful and unconstitutional to remove persons who are registered on that list, unless they are disqualified on grounds laid down in the law,” he posited.

Nandlall further maintained that these changes to the list can only be made by GECOM, and not by any political party or politician.

GECOM Chair Justice (ret’d) Claudette Singh

According to the Guyana Constitution, a person’s name can only be removed from the voters’ list through death, or if they become disqualified under Article 159 (2), (3) and (4).

During a press conference on Tuesday, Norton contended, “We stand by our position on the need for a clean voters’ list and biometric identification at polling places.”

Legally there

But only last week, GECOM Chair, Justice (ret’d) Claudette Singh, told reporters that everyone on the voters’ list is legally there. She added that if indeed the list is bloated, as alleged by the Opposition, then the ongoing ‘claims and objections’ exercise can be used to contest them and have them removed.

On Monday, GECOM rolled out the claims and objections exercise’, which is a follow-up process to the continuous registration. According to the law, a ‘claims and objections’ period is for persons seeking to make a claim to be included on the list, or make objections to their voter’s information, such as to change their address.

Opposition Leader Aubrey Norton

During this period, any person who would be 18 years and older by October 31, 2022 and is a Guyanese citizen by birth, descent, or naturalisation, or is a citizen from a Commonwealth country living in Guyana for one year or more, can make a claim, on or before September 11, 2022, to be included on the Official List of Electors (OLE) – from which the voters’ list is extracted – provided that he/she had never previously been registered.

Persons can also make objections to the inclusion of names in the preliminary list for reasons such as if the person is dead. The claims aspect of the exercise would last until September 11, while the objections aspect would be concluded on September 15.

The GECOM Chair had noted that these exercises are in preparation for the hosting of Local Government Elections (LGE) later this year.

Norton, during the press conference, related that APNU/AFC would ask its constituents to participate in the ‘claims and objections’ exercise, but added that it does not mean the party would agree to go to the polls with the existing list.

Last week, Vice President Dr Bharrat Jagdeo had opined that Norton’s threats to boycott the elections is a “big gaff”, and that he would have to “back-pedal” on his position for the Coalition Opposition to participate in the local government polls.

Jagdeo, the General Secretary of the governing People’s Progressive Party/Civic, also indicated that once GECOM indicates its readiness, the PPP/C is ready to participate in LGE this year.

Local Government Elections, which are constitutionally due every two years, is long overdue, having last been held in November 2018.

At that poll, the then PPP/C Opposition had secured 52 of the 80 Local Authority Areas (LAAs). This followed the holding of the LGE in 2016, during which the PPP/C also claimed the majority of the LAAs – both under the ruling APNU/AFC administration. (G8)

Operations will be guided only by constitutional, legal provisions – GECOM

GECOM Chair (Ret'd) Justice Claudette Singh

In light of the APNU/AFC’s recent calls for the voters’ list to be cleansed, the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) has contended that it will only act by the Constitution of Guyana and legal provisions.

Opposition Leader Aubrey Norton has been pushing to have a clean voters’ list, which he maintains is “bloated.” He has also threatened to boycott and block future elections if this is not done.

But GECOM explained in a statement on Friday that while it is cognisant of those concerns, it cannot act contrary to the legal provisions enacted in the National Registration Act (NRA), Chapter 19:08 – something which it says has been extensively ventilated at the meetings of the Elections Commission.

The NRA dictates the procedures for the registration of eligible persons and likewise the removal of any such person from the National Register of Registrants Database (NRRDB), from which the existing Preliminary List of Electors (PLE) was extracted. The voters’ list or Official List of Electors (OLE) is established from the PLE.

“…It is not that the concerns of stakeholders about the PLE are being ignored, but GECOM must act within the framework of the Laws of Guyana,” GECOM said.

The Elections Commission reminded that the eligibility requirement for registration is that one must be a Guyanese citizen by birth, descent, or naturalisation; or a citizen of a Commonwealth country living in Guyana for one year or more. Once persons have met those requirements and have been registered, their registration is and remains legal. It follows that any removal of their names from the NRRDB, without a legal basis, would be unlawful and unconstitutional.

Existing legislation provides that the removal of names from the NRRDB can only be done through the legal methodology which includes the receipt of monthly reports from the General Register Office (GRO) or through an Objections process; which allows for any elector, or suitably accredited scrutineers of political parties, to object to the inclusion of names in the PLE whom they suspect may not be eligible. However, the burden of proof would be on the objector to present at the time of the relevant hearing(s) to substantiate the objection(s).

Currently, GECOM is conducting a Claims and Objections exercise that started this week and will run until mid-September.

Moreover, the electoral body further pointed to the August 2019 ruling of Chief Justice (ag), Roxane George, in the matter of Christopher Ram vs Guyana Elections Commission about the House-to-House Registration exercise in 2019. In that decision, the CJ ruled that “for the names of persons already registered to be removed from the list of electors, they would have to be deceased or otherwise become disqualified but the failure of registered persons to be present or resident during the House-to-House exercise would not be such a disqualifier and such a person’s name can only be deleted if they no longer meet the qualifying criteria under Article 159(2) or become disqualified under Article 159 (3) and (4).”

Justice George further ruled that “GECOM would have no legal authority to remove or deregister such persons who are otherwise qualified unless such registration can be cancelled under Section 8, which provides for cancellation of registration, or in the Claims and Objections period under Section 15 of the National Registration Act and the Regulations thereto.” The Chief Justice concluded that if GECOM is to act outside of those legal provisions, “it would be unconstitutional and, therefore, illegal.”

According to GECOM, it is of crucial importance to mention that the decision of the Chief Justice was not appealed, and, therefore, only by way of the enactment of legislation can persons’ names be removed from the NRRDB.

To this end, the Elections Commission is reminding persons that the ongoing Claims and Objections exercise allows for all eligible persons to make a claim to be included in the OLE and provides the opportunity for all those persons who are already registered to check the accuracy of their registration records in the PLE that is posted countrywide in every Registration Division/Sub-Division. Accordingly, any such person can apply for changes/corrections to his/her registration particulars on or before September 11, should this be required.

Additionally, the Commission is also strongly urging persons to scrutinise the PLE, and object to the inclusion of the names of persons, whom they suspect may not be eligible for such inclusion, on or before September 15. Original documentary evidence must be provided to support the objection by the law.

Nevertheless, GECOM further stated that it remains resolute in its vision, “to maintain and further develop the capacity to conduct credible registration; General, Regional and Local Elections which enjoy the confidence of all Guyanese and meet international standards for elections”.

This statement by GECOM outlining the laws it operates under comes on the heels of Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister Anil Nandlall, SC, earlier this week calling on the Commission to clarify to the public, and more so the APNU/AFC, that it cannot remove the names of persons from the voters’ list at the whim of its leader.

Last week, GECOM Chair, Retired Justice Claudette Singh told reporters that everyone on the voters’ list is legally there. She added too that if indeed the list is bloated as alleged by the Opposition, then the ongoing Claims and Objections exercise can be used to contest names and have them removed.

No objections filed after 1 week of GECOM’s ‘Claims & Objections’ exercise

File Photo: A GECOM ballot clerk desk during voting for the Joint Services for the 2020 elections

One week after the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) embarked on its Claims and Objections exercise, over 2000 transactions – none of which were objections – have been recorded.

GECOM embarked on Claims and Objections on August 22, allowing persons to, among other things, object to any dead persons that may be on the Preliminary List of Electors (PLE), from which the Official List of Electors (OLE) is gleaned.

According to statistics provided by GECOM’s Public Relations Officer Yolanda Ward to this publication, as of Monday, August 29, 2327 transactions were recorded during the ongoing exercise.

The transactions that were documented by GECOM amount to 977 new registrations of persons 18 years and older, 419 transfers, 329 changes/corrections, 517 replacements and 85 retaken photographs.

The Claims and Objections exercise will run until mid-September and is being done at all GECOM registration offices across the country. Eligible persons can make a claim to be included in the OLE.

On the other hand, persons can also make objections against the inclusion of names in the preliminary list, for reasons such as if the person is dead. All they are required to do is present the necessary documents to verify that the person is dead.

The parliamentary A Partnership for National unity/Alliance For Change (APNU/AFC) Opposition has been arguing that the current voters’ list is bloated, with, among other things, the names of dead persons, and needs to be cleansed.

However, GECOM Chairman, Retired Justice Claudette Singh had posited that the list is not bloated. In fact, she had said in a recent interview with the media that, even if it were bloated, this process would allow for objections to those persons who should not be on the said list.

“Everyone on the list, the people were there. They weren’t bloated. They were legally there on the list. And if the list is bloated, well we’re moving now to Claims and Objections. People will have a chance to object to who shouldn’t be there,” the Chairperson had said.

GECOM subsequently released a statement in which they announced that Claims and Objections would start on August 22, 2022. This will be done at all GECOM permanent registration offices and will allow persons turning 18 years and over by October 31, 2022, to make a claim to be included in the voters’ list.

On the other hand, persons can also make objections against the inclusion of names in the preliminary list, for reasons such as if the person is dead. The claims section of the exercise will last until September 11, while objections will close on September 15.

“Objections against the inclusion of names in the PLE can be tendered to the Registration Officer of the Registration Area from 22nd August, 2022 to 15th September, 2022.

Objections can be made by an elector who is listed in the same Division list/Sub Division list in which the person being objected to is listed.”

The Commission had gone on to urge all eligible persons to ensure that they use this opportunity to be registered for inclusion in the Revised List of Electors (RLE) and ultimately the Official List of Electors (OLE) in order to be eligible to vote.

“Persons are also encouraged to object to the inclusion of the name of any person whom they believe should not be in the list, based on the legal provisions,” GECOM went on to state in their release.

GECOM has been working on holding Local Government Elections (LGE) by this year end. However, there is a workplan being examined by the Commission, that proposes holding it early next year.

In an interview with this publication, GECOM Commissioner Sase Gunraj had explained that the workplan was submitted by Chief Elections Officer (CEO) Vishnu Persaud, but they have not discussed it in detail yet.

“We’ve received a workplan which proposes a date next year, which we are to discuss and finalise… we have not yet interrogated the workplan and confirmed it as yet,” Gunraj explained, noting that the CEO had been asked to revise his workplan last week.

Some sources, meanwhile, indicate that the workplan proposes the holding of LGE in January 2023, as a realistic date to carry out the logistics required for elections. There is also a February 13 date that has been proposed.

LGE, which are usually due every two years, was last held in 2018. At the last LGE in November 2018, the then People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) Opposition had secured 52 of the 80 Local Authority Areas (LAAs). This followed the holding of the LGE in 2016, during which the PPP/C also claimed the majority of the LAAs.

Why is Norton obsessed with the removal of the GECOM’s Chairman

Sep 03, 2022 Letters --- Source -- https://www.kaieteurnewsonline...the-gecoms-chairman/

Dear Editor,

There has been a longstanding argument within the ranks of the Opposition that the GECOM Chairman must demit office and that she should do so immediately.

It all stems from that party’s valiant effort at getting the former justice to sign on to a fraudulent declaration to make them winners of the March 2, 2020 General Election which the alert justice did not accede to. This infuriated them and from that day onwards, the Opposition has been singing that chorus that the Chairwoman must go.

The point is they wanted a chairperson who they could control or one that is a puppet on a string easily swayed by their whims and fancies. It was their mistaken belief that they could have goaded her into signing an illegal document, and seal the deal in that final chapter of their rigging apparatus. But that sordid arrangement was met with a blunt no, which has caused them to turn on the Chairwoman with unconcealed venom.

One must remember that the first call for a verification recount of the votes came from Justice Singh herself. The keen and erudite judge was the person who initiated the call for a recount, in her own words “We shall count the votes all over again, one by one.” She later would go on to say, “I want not one dollar of the oil money,” Judging from the fact that she knew the narrative the PNC would throw her way. A vast number of their followers peddled the false accusation that the Chairwoman took bribes, so the former justice was making it pellucidly clear that that was not the case.

You see, the mountain Aubrey Norton, Leader of the Opposition would have to surmount is that Justice Singh was legally and aboveboard in her selection to office. Unlike her predecessor, James Patterson who was selected on the basis of being a rubber stamp for the PNC, there was nothing untoward in Singh’s appointment. However, in all of this, Norton and the PNC’s remorse to this day would have been “We should have done a more thorough background check to confirm her political leanings and whether she was into the rigging of a legitimate process.” That is the irksome task that has him having nightmares right now.

Finally, Justice Singh with her many years of experience would know who the PNC are. Who can know the PNC more than Madam Justice Singh- their lies, propaganda and deceit. As a Guyanese, she would have witnessed it in her daily life and moreso in the courts where she presided.

Respectfully ,
Neil Adams

Jagdeo too lenient on oil companies

…more empty promises being made to address Local Content woes – Norton

Sep 03, 2022 News --- Source -- https://www.kaieteurnewsonline...nt-on-oil-companies/

Kaieteur News
By Davina Bagot

Two weeks ago, Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo addressed the issue of contract bundling by the oil companies, inserting that the government will address the matter. However, Opposition Leader, Aubrey Norton believes that this is another empty promise made by Jagdeo, even as local businesses continue to decry the situation in which the Local Content Secretariat has noted is simply an industry norm.

The Opposition Leader in an interview on Wednesday told this publication that this explanation stinks of incompetence.

His position on the matter is, “If you pass a Local Content Act then you are obligated to do everything to ensure it functions in the way it is intended and therefore for them to say, this is just a normal course of thing…that sounds like mere incompetence to me rather than what they are suggesting.”

He went on to explain, “Jagdeo has never been a competent person and therefore Jagdeo has always lived on promises and don’t necessarily deliver but I don’t know what else is expected.”

Norton believes that a strategic method of addressing this particular issue would be to first listen to the concerns raised, before moving to identify measures to iron out those. A third step, which he believes is equally important would allow for a constant review mechanism which would seek to ensure the issue remains resolved rather than repeat itself.

Further, he told this publication that from the People’s Progressive Party’s (PPP’s) posture, it is evident that the political group is not concerned about the wider public sector, but rather “an elite” few.

“The government doesn’t really promote the private sector, they promote an elite group in the private sector while the wider private sector is left to battle on its own, and if they want to promote the interest of the wider private sector, then they would have a structured approach to deal with the local content matter rather than suggest that this is just an industry norm,” he said.

On the issue of the VP, who has been calling the shots in the country’s petroleum sector, being too lenient on the oil companies, the Leader reasoned, “I said the government is incompetent, second, I don’t think they are developing the human resource and institutional capacity to be able to deal with the oil companies and therefore if you add to that corruption, you would recognise in some regard the government wouldn’t want those problems solved because it will eat into the corruption money, so it is not only lenient, it’s a function of what the government perceives as its interest.”

To this end, Norton concluded, “The government has effectively abandoned the people of Guyana though they made the point regularly that the people must benefit from these contracts and from oil generally.” As such, he argued, “if they don’t build the capacity to do what they need to do, they will always come over as lenient and weak to the oil companies.”

During his last press conference, VP Jagdeo told reporters that the government will be addressing the complaints from the local private sector.

He explained, “We made it clear to the oil and gas companies that it’s not just about local content, the big dealing with local content is the carve outs that there must be a fair opportunity for Guyanese and other companies to be able to identify and bid on other opportunities that are available to the company.”

Jagdeo added that while there are some technical areas which would prove difficult to unbundle, he believes that the oil companies and the first tier contractors can do much more to present opportunities for locals.

According to him, “I’ve seen a lot of people who pushed us to be very aggressive on the local content legislation and to look at high ratios for carve outs, they are doing very little – just sitting around griping – these are some local companies too, sitting around griping all day long instead of setting themselves up to make use of these opportunities.”

Despite the passage of the Guyana’s Local Content legislation in December 2021; local businesses have been struggling to benefit from the oil and gas sector.

The Local Content law is intended to regulate the way companies operate in Guyana’s oil and gas sector; employ persons, buy services and the way that they procure goods.

Since the passage of the legislation, several members of Guyana’s private sector have voiced concerns in relation to local content issues, particularly, the bundling of contracts by oil companies and the lengthy time it takes oil and gas companies to pay local businesses for goods and services provided.

President of the Georgetown Chamber of Commerce and Industry (GCCI), Timothy Tucker has reiterated the issue of the bundling of contracts by oil companies on numerous occasions. He argued that this has been stifling local businesses.

The Chamber in a statement said that it has taken note of recurrent contract bundling practices within Guyana’s petroleum sector and expressed its disapproval of this practice.

ExxonMobil and Contract bundling

Meanwhile, President of ExxonMobil Guyana, Alistair Routledge has made it clear that the bundling of contracts serve as a very useful function, hinting at the same time that Guyanese should become comfortable with this norm.

During an interview with an online media outlet, Newsroom, Routledge was asked whether the company engages in contract bundling to which he answered in the affirmative.

He noted that ExxonMobil Guyana is an oil and gas operator, hence it does not specialise in other areas, pointing to the need for specialised services to be offered to the company. In offering a case in point, Routledge in the interview said it was only earlier in the week that the company convened a meeting with a group of local contractors, indicating that Exxon was in search of a company to assist in office management.

According to the subsidiary’s President, “We’re an oil and gas operator, now take for example of say running an office, we recently held a request for information (RFI) or interest session with a number of local companies earlier this week and we made the point that we are not an office management company; we’re an oil and gas operator. So, we are looking for a company that can help us to run an office.”

He went on to point out that this means, any client hired by the company to “run the office” will also have to offer janitorial and pest control services for example. “We then would expect that company will go looking for particular services like janitorial services, like ground maintenance services, pest control, that is normal,” Routledge indicated. Adding that “the benefit of us passing that, if you like, as a managed service to another company is they then will find those services with local companies as well and when they go and they manage other buildings, which is their business, they then will provide other opportunities for those sub-contractors in that chain.”

As such, he contended, “Yes, some people have criticised bundling, but it actually serves a very useful function in cascading opportunities through the supply chain whether it’s in running offices, whether it’s providing logistic services or whatever it may be, it is normal practice around the world to have this normal structure in any industry.”