On July 29th, Justice of Appeal (rtd) Claudette Singh was appointed as the new Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM). Her appointment was not the result of the normal run-of-the-mill process. It had come after President Granger had callously rejected three lists from the Opposition Leader, Mr Jagdeo with a total of 18 candidates, a number of them eminently suitable for the position of GECOM Chairman. Following the repudiation of the lists and in defiance of the Constitution of the Republic of Guyana, President Granger proceeded to unilaterally appoint Justice (rtd) James Patterson as Chairman of GECOM on October 19, 2017.
Needless to say, in the period of the challenge to his appointment, Mr Patterson and President Granger were ad idem in not observing the constitutional requirement for general elections to be held in three months from the passage of the motion of no confidence against the APNU+AFC government on December 21, 2018. After initially accepting the outcome of the vote, President Granger and his administration proceeded on baseless challenges to Parliament’s authority on the question of the validity of the motion.
For his part, even though GECOM is constitutionally accoutred to prepare for general elections without direction from anyone else, Mr Patterson took no effective action and his failure was in lockstep with President Granger’s defiance of the effect of the parliamentary motion and the constitutional edicts it invoked.
After challenges through three tiers of court, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) ruled on June 18, 2019 that President Granger had breached the Guyana Constitution in the appointment of Mr Patterson. Thereafter President Granger continued to stall on the appointment of a consensual GECOM Chairman rejecting even more names until he alighted on that of Ms Singh on July 26th.
It was this bitter chalice that Ms Singh held from July 29th in the backdrop of the CCJ having stated emphatically on June 18 and July 12 that the consequence of the upholding of the motion of no confidence was that articles 106 (6) and (7) of the Constitution were immediately in effect. These parts of the constitution need no further explication. They required the resignation of Cabinet including the President, which caretaker President Granger has refused to do, and importantly for GECOM, General and Regional Elections to be held in three months unless an extension was supported by two-thirds of the National Assembly meaning that the opposition would have to provide its support.
Ms Singh’s task has been further complicated by the injudicious and insupportable launch of house-to-house registration by the discredited Patterson Commission. The order issued by Mr Patterson, while upheld by the court, clearly aided the efforts of the government and their appointed commissioners in defying the constitutional requirement of elections in three months. Millions of dollars have already been frittered away on this exercise which was completely unnecessary and cannot obliterate the standing register from which the list of electors for the November 12, 2018 local government elections was extracted.
Four weeks after her appointment, the public has no idea what the thinking of Ms Singh is on the pivotal matters of house-to-house registration and complying with the Constitution of Guyana even though she has convened audiences with both sides of the commission and held several statutory meetings.
What is however clear from the public statements of both sides of the commission is that they remain at diametrically opposed positions. Whatever the disputation is about, there is only one principle that must guide Ms Singh in her work: recognition of the constitution and adherence to it.
The constitutional requirement for elections in three months cannot be infringed upon by the reckless launch of house-to-house registration or hand-wringing over how it may look if the entire exercise is vitiated and money is wasted. Indeed, in her role as High Court judge Ms Singh had no qualms about vitiating an entire election on the grounds of the unconstitutionality of voter ID cards. Ergo, Ms Singh will understand that the constitution cannot be a bargaining chip to trade between two political combatants. The Constitution is not to be trifled with, defied or held to ransom. It must be upheld and honoured particularly since it has come under such severe threat from the executive. A September 18 deadline for the election is no longer practicable but the required parliamentary extension seems only likely if GECOM recognises that it must comply with what the Constitution says. The public expects Ms Singh to uphold the constitution and she will have the opportunity to do so if the various questions are finally put to a vote at GECOM tomorrow.
