With general elections less than a year away, the parliamentary opposition parties are against any electoral reforms that could result in a postponement.
This was the view coming out of a civil society-hosted event yesterday at which the parties addressed matters such as reforming the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), campaign financing and geographic constituencies. The event was facilitated by the Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA) as part of International Human Rights Day activities and saw presentations by representatives of the main opposition PNCR, the AFC, the WPA, GAP and the TUF.
The ruling PPP/C had been invited to the forum but according the GHRA’s Mike McCormack on Thursday the party indicated that its executives would be busy and could not attend. At the end of the forum, it was decided that the GHRA would follow up with the PPP/C in order to understand their positions on the issues discussed, that a follow up forum be held and that a report be prepared circulated on the outcome of the forum, on talks with the ruling party and a framework on the way forward.
The Working Peoples Alliance’s Desmond Trotman said they had been consistently calling for electoral reforms but stated that parties must take some blame for the lack of movement on the issue. However, he added that it was a “ridiculous position” to be calling for reforms at this time.
“Even though the WPA believes that the reform of the electoral process is extremely important, we have to be concerned that we may very well be operating in a situation where it is that time doesn’t permit for the kind of struggle to ensure that the reforms which are necessary should come out.
“We want to ensure that the elections are held by the constitutionally due date and we feel that nothing should happen to put back those elections.”
According to Trotman, “that is what the people of the country want.”
The WPA executive also supported the idea of reforming GECOM, stating that the agency needed to be depoliticized. Another talking point was the party lists, which he said currently do not give voters an opportunity to identify with their choice of candidate. The WPA, he said, favoured a priority list.
“We believe that if that happens it makes the process more democratic but if you’re to continue along the way with a list where people are not sure of who their representative will be, it really makes the whole process of going to the polls I believe a kind of nebulous one,” he said. Meanwhile, he added that it was an “abomination” to have a system where ten regions are described as 10 constituencies. Further, Trotman posited, people must be able to vote for a particular candidate without voting for the party if they so desire.
Campaign financing and party incorporation were also issues discussed and Trotman stated that while it affected the way in which a party functions during electioneering, it also affected the post-election situation, which he said could be “dangerous.”
“We believe that campaign financing must be an issue that should be settled even before the election is held but I’m not sure the will is there to address it.”
He stated that the way the party lists are presented and the overhaul of the geographic constituencies were also matters that could be dealt with before elections.
Meanwhile, the AFC’s David Patterson said his party was in favour of the reform of GECOM. They proposed a seven man commission with two commissioners appointed by the president; another two by the leader of the opposition after meaningful consultation with other parliamentary parties; two to be appointed by civil society; and with the chairman being appointed from a list. Patterson said they also proposed term limits for the commissioners. The current commissioners are serving indefinitely.
According to Patterson, they propose that the politically appointed commissioners serve for a period of five years, and the chairman and civil society appointed ones seven years. No commissioner or chairman should serve more than one term with the only exception being if the expiration date falls within six months of scheduled elections. On the issue of geographic constituencies, Patterson noted that work had started during the 2001 constitutional review but was never completed. He said the AFC would support a move to constituency demarcation.
He also pointed out that the AFC had taken a unanimous decision in 2009 to list its candidates in order of priority on its party list and that it was registered as a not for profit entity under the Companies Act. On the latter point, he noted that this ensured that the AFC came under regulatory scrutiny.
“We would be advocating like in other jurisdictions whereby GECOM plays a greater role in the administration of the inner working of political parties such as internal party elections. The AFC is willing to be associated with something like that,” Patterson added.
AFC Vice-Chairperson Sheila Holder also has a motion in parliament pointing out the need for campaign finance laws, he said, adding that they hoped it gets unanimous support from the political parties.
Everall Franklin, the parliamentarian from the Guyana Action Party also supported the need for electoral reform but stated that he believed the need for constitutional reform was more pressing.
“You can have the electoral reforms and win some of the cases that you’re fighting for but if you have an executive president still operating it would nullify some of the gains you’d have within the changes in electoral reform,” Franklin said.
He argued that as obtains now, the president has an absolute hand in dealing with matters with the net result being the president making all the decisions.
“If one looked carefully at the present constitution of Guyana one sees that three entities make significant decisions; the president, Cabinet and parliament.
The Cabinet is the presidency, members of parliament are not elected by the people but are selected by their parties, they owe their seats to the party, not to the people, and therefore must vote to please that party, not the people.”
GAP’s proposal, he said, was the establishment of a bicameral parliament, with one House elected by a first past the post system and the other by proportional representation.
“The major advantage of two Houses is that the process of lawmaking cannot be rushed or bullied past parliament. In passing through two Houses the process slows and becomes much more visible to the people. And secondly, some members would owe their seats to the constituents and not the party.”
Franklin said he believed GECOM should be independent of party and government control and stated that this would require its budget being approved by the parliament and the agency managing its own finances. He added that commissioners and their families should be insulated from “interference.” According to Franklin, having reforms would not mean that everyone else would act in a manner that is conducive to good governance.
He also agreed for the need for campaign financing regulations but noted that GECOM, which is constitutionally mandated to deal with the issue, seems unable to impose its authority.
However, The United Force leader Manzoor Nadir said he believed that Guyana’s elections are being held in a “fair, inclusive and transparent manner.” Additionally, he said, the party does not support any change to the geographic constituency allocation.
“The United Force is on record and we haven’t changed our position since the early 60s that we should have proportional representation as we had prior to constituency and we’re continuing with our quest to ensure we hold on to that position.”
According to Nadir, that position has contributed to there being more players in the arena and that in its absence there may have been only two parties in parliament. As it related to GECOM, he added that they were “very pleased” with the formula used to establish the agency.
“The rules of the game ought to be set by the players of the game,” he said. According to Nadir, the present system “provides a lot of confidence for contesting parties.” He also opposed any change in favour of candidates representing geographic constituencies while on the matter of legally incorporating parties, the labour minister in the PPP/C government said he felt there should be no such provision.
And on campaign financing, Nadir said that the TUF did not believe that “money buys elections.” He added that the TUF will ventilate fully on the issue when Holder’s motion comes up before the House shortly.
Vice-chairman of the PNCR Basil Williams in his presentation also stated his party’s belief in an independent elections commission. He added that while they had no problem with the way the commission is structured now they were not averse to civil society participation. However, Williams said they were opposed to commissioners being life members.
“That’s ridiculous. I personally have drafted to parliament an amendment to ensure that we have the commissioners serving at least up to the next elections. But in order to have the type of institutional memory you start rotating them so that at no time you have all five coming off at the same time.”
Combining the issues of the party list and geographic constituency, Williams said they both speak to accountability. The PNCR, he said, preferred to have a closed list, while adding that to land a representative in a particular constituency would require having an independent boundaries commission.
“GECOM as we have seen with the local government situation, they’re not fit to do that, we’ve had numerous problems with them in determining boundaries. At the national level we would have to follow other jurisdictions and have an independent boundaries commission and then they would have to go about dividing up the country. That I can assure you can’t be done before the next elections,” Williams stated.
He reiterated Trotman’s urging that nothing be done that would lead to the postponement of the 2011 general elections.
Finally, Williams noted that the Organisation of American States had started work at the regional level on campaign financing and the registration of parties. He added that any talk of campaign financing at this time needs to involve the PPP/C.
“This has to be a comprehensive approach to campaign financing where we know we can tie the hands of this government and ensure that they can’t use up state funds around elections time,” Williams declared.
