It would be illegal to merge data from the recent house-to-house registration process with existing electoral lists and any attempt will “contaminate the entire electoral process,” former Attorney General and PPP/C executive Anil Nandlall says.
“There is no provision in this statutory process for the data generated from the house-to-house exercise to be used in the electoral process. Neither is there any provision in the law which authorises the compilation of a list from that data and there is also no statutory provision for what use can be made of either the list or the data contained on that list,” Nandall yesterday told the Stabroek News.
“There is certainly no provision in the law for that list to be merged with the NRR [National Register of Registrants], the PLE [Preliminary List of Electors], the Revised List of Electors or the OLE [Official List of Electors]. Any attempt to merge this list with any of the aforementioned lists would contaminate the entire electoral process,” he added.
He referred to actions by former Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Chairman, retired Justice James Patterson, just before his appointment was declared unconstitutional by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), when he had issued an Order for GECOM to commence the house-to-house registration process.
“The stated objective was to create a new National Register of Registrants because it was felt that the current NRR was “bloated” with names of persons who have migrated and/or dead. This process commenced. However, its legality was challenged by proceedings filed by Mr Christopher Ram. Chief Justice Roxanne George-Wiltshire, who heard the case ruled, inter alia, that the data accumulated through this exercise cannot be used to remove the names of persons on the existing NRR on the basis of non-residency in Guyana since residency is neither a qualification to be registered nor is it a qualification to vote by virtue of Articles 59 and 159 of the Constitution,” Nandall pointed out.
Further, he added, “As a result of this ruling, when Justice Claudette Singh (rtd) assumed the chair of GECOM, one of the first decisions that was made was to abort the house-to-house registration exercise.”
In accordance with the provisions of the National Registration Act, a PLE drawn from the expired OLE and the NRR was published countrywide to commence the Claims and Objections period as is required by the law. This claims and objections process is ongoing.
Last week, GECOM published in the form of a list, the data generated from the house-to-house exercise and posted this list wherever the PLE was posted, with no directions whatsoever to members of the public, as to what use is to be made of this list.
This newspaper visited several locations in Georgetown and observed that lists of names had been published and displayed under the heading “House to House 2019: List of Applicants.”
The lists have been attached to the PLE. The PLE was published via an Order signed by GECOM chair Justice Claudette Singh on September 26th. This Order, which is attached to each copy of the PLE, advises persons that between the days of October 1 and November 11, they may, if they qualify to do so, make a claim to be included on the list or object to the inclusion of a person not similarly qualified.
When an explanation was sought from the Chief Election Officer (CEO) Keith Lowenfield and GECOM Public Relations Officer Yolanda Ward, none was given and it remains unclear as to the purpose of GECOM’s actions.
However, government-nominated commissioner Charles Corbin, in an invited comment, has said that the transactions published should be treated with “the same procedure used during claims and objections.”
“The persons who were registered during the house-to-house [exercise] would need to verify that the information there is that which they recorded,” he had stressed, before adding that this information may trigger a statement of revision which is a normal process set out in legislation.
According to Corbin, because of the peculiarity of the sequence of the activities in the current process, this list was published after the PLE when it is usually published prior to the preparation of that list.
He noted that the list does not need to be accompanied by an Order and argued that since the publication was in keeping with the decision of the Chair made just prior to her letter to President David Granger on GECOM’s readiness for elections, the Secretariat did not need to be given a further directive from the commission.
Nandall rubbished the explanation saying that that the electoral process is a statutory one. “Therefore, every link in this statutory chain is provided for in the law. Every list to be used, and the use which is to be made of these lists are all the subject of express provisions in the relevant statutes. Any violation of this statutory code, or any action outside of this statutory code, would be unlawful, illegal and ultra vires and is capable of forming the basis for the entire elections to be set aside by an Elections Petition,” he argued.
“Significantly, the data which eventually reaches the OLE, by law, must undergo public scrutiny. This is done by the claims and objections mechanism. This dubious list will not endure claims and objections as it is not part of the claims and objections period which is ongoing. As I said before, there is no provision in the law for that to be done,” he added.
Notwithstanding, he believes that the integrity of the data contained in this list is highly questionable. “The data was accumulated with the involvement of only one political party; many names on the list cannot be found at the addresses stated; more than 90 per cent of the list constitutes double registration which is illegal and is a criminal offence under the Registration Act; and there are a whole host of misspelling and misinformation on the list,” he posited.
Nandall said that he understands that at some centres across the country, persons have also been turned away when they visit to register themselves, “on the ground that their names are on the list already.
“This is completely wrong and will lead to disenfranchisement because that list cannot lawfully be used for the elections,” he said.
The seven-member commission will again meet tomorrow for its customary weekly statutory meetings.
