The Chairperson of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) retired Justice Claudette Singh has been accused of facilitating “prevarications and political shenaniganism.”
Opposition Parliamentarian and former Attorney General Anil Nandlall declared in a public statement yesterday that Singh seems to be facilitating the tactics of the government-nominated commissioners in “apparent oblivion to the clear language of Articles 106(6) and 106(7) of the Constitution, the Consequential Orders of the CCJ and the recent ruling of the Chief Justice which all concatenate to the conclusion that elections are constitutionally overdue since March 21, 2019.”
According to Nandlall it appears that there is an attempt by Singh to appease both sides in a matrix where there is simply no place for compromise.
“The reality is that the demands of one side is for constitutional compliance while the demands of the other side is to perpetuate constitutional non-compliance. In such Constitutional compliance is the only option. The Chairperson of GECOM knows this more than most others,” he declared.
The Sunday Stabroek was unable to reach Singh for a comment.
Nandlall also called out his successor, Basil Williams for appealing the CJ’s ruling which he (Williams) had declared a “massive victory” and argued that the three government-nominated commissioners will use this appeal to further delay making a decision at the level of GECOM.
“This appeal is …completely without merit but will provide another platform for the Government Commissioners at GECOM to dilate. Rest assured, next week, they will argue that GECOM should await the determination of this appeal,” he said.On Friday, Williams appealed the August 14 ruling by acting Chief Justice Roxane George-Wiltshire which upheld the legality of the House to House (HtH) registration exercise but also declared that existing registrants cannot be excised from a new voters’ list unless they are deceased or otherwise disqualified under Article 159 (2), (3) or (4).
Williams in his submission has provided 16 points of appeal including the argument that Section 6 of the Registration Act provides for “residency” during the period of a qualifying date as a requirement for registration.
For Nandlall this is an attempt to have the Court of Appeal add “residency” as a qualification for registration when Article 159 of the Constitution, which enumerates the qualifications for registration, does not so provide.
