The United States Government is entirely non-partisan
about which party wins Guyana’s 2020 elections. The
major parties – and the smaller ones too – all offer the
opportunity to continue an excellent bilateral relation
ship based on a shared commitment to supporting
improved governance, prosperity, and security in
Guyana. Let’s get on with that important work.
U.S. Ambassador Sarah-Ann Lynch
Last Monday, CNN reported that the WTI price of crude oil plunged to below $20 per barrel while the Brent crude was trading at $22.19 per barrel, the lowest since 2002. This was mainly due to the impact of the coronavirus pandemic that is adversely affecting demand for the product. The Bank of America estimates that global demand during this quarter will be reduced by 12 million barrels per day, or 12 percent, which is the steepest decline ever recorded. The situation has been exacerbated by Russia and Saudi Arabia refusing to cut production in response to steep falling demand in what is viewed as a price war between the two major OPEC members that has resulted in the flooding of the oil market. CNN also reported that the world may be running out of storage space because of the glut in supply, which will cause crude oil prices to be further depressed.
This is our fifth article on the aftermath of the 2020 national and regional elections. After 35 days, the results are yet to be officially declared because of two attempts by Returning Officer (RO) for Region 4 to declare the results for that region without following the requirements of the law in the counting of the ballots. The second attempt was in violation of the Chief Justice’s ruling that the Statements of Poll (SOPs) must be used to tabulate the results in the presence of all the political parties contesting the elections. The international and local observers, political parties (except APNU+AFC), other key stakeholders and some prominent citizens are all unanimous in their view that RO’s declarations lacked transparency and credibility, and there were calls for a recount of the votes cast.
Faced with this situation as well as the threat of sanctions from the international community if the President is sworn in based on what is widely believed to be flawed results, the Chair of CARICOM acquiesced to an agreement with the President and the Opposition Leader for the recount to be carried out under supervision from a high-level CARICOM team. The team arrived in the country but had to leave two days later because an APNU+AFC candidate applied to the court to stop the proposed recount. The High Court presided over by Justice Franklyn Holder granted the injunctions. At the hearing, lawyers for the Opposition Leader raised the issue of whether the court had jurisdiction over the matter. They relied on Section 140 of the Representation of the People Act which precludes decisions of the Commission from being enquired into by a court of law, other than by way of an elections petition. Justice Holder, however, held that the court had such jurisdiction and declined a request for a stay of execution. The Opposition Leader appealed the judge’s ruling.
Today, we continue with our coverage of the elections-related events that took place during the course of last week.
Full Court hearing and ruling
The hearing of the appeal commenced on Monday at the sitting of the Full Court of the High Court presided over by Chief Justice Roxane George-Wiltshire and Justice Nareshwar Harnanan. After reviewing oral and written arguments, the judges granted a stay of the proceedings in the High Court until a ruling of the Full Court is made. The following day, the Full Court ruled that the injunctions to halt the proposed recount were null and void and that the matters giving rise to them would be better dealt with via an election petition. The judges based their decision on several precedents and more specifically on the public assurance that GECOM Chair had given for a recount to take place as allowed for under Article 162 (1) (b) of the Constitution:
The Commission shall issue such instructions and take
such action as appear to it necessary and expedient to
ensure impartiality, fairness and compliance with the
provisions of this Constitution or of any Act of
Parliament on the part of persons exercising powers or
performing duties connected with or relating to the
matters aforesaid.
Lawyers for the APNU+AFC candidate applied for leave to file an appeal in the Court of Appeal and for a stay of the proceedings until the appeal is heard and determined. However, the Full Court denied the applications on the ground that there was no real merit or prospect of success. The APNU+AFC candidate then sought the intervention of the Court of Appeal to direct the Full Court to reconsider its decision to disallow the appeal. The hearing of the matter commenced on Thursday at which the Appeal Court decided to accept written submissions from the lawyers for both parties. On Friday, the Court heard oral arguments for and against the disallowance of the appeal, and a decision was expected yesterday.
Statement by the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group
At its 56th meeting last Tuesday, the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group noted that the Guyana Constitution clearly states that sovereignty belongs to the people. Accordingly, it called on GECOM ‘to immediately fulfil its constitutional mandate and ensure the sovereign right of the people of Guyana to duly elect their Government is respected through a transparent and credible counting and tabulation process’. It warned that ‘any Government which is sworn in without a credible and fully transparent vote count and tabulation process would lack legitimacy’.
Statement by the U.S. Ambassador
In the midst of criticisms by the Government of statements from the diplomatic missions in Guyana on the conduct of the elections and the tabulation of the results, U.S. Ambassador Sarah-Ann Lynch stated:
A common criticism of diplomatic statements during
politically charged election cycles is that they amount
to “foreign interference.” But in foreign policy, the
difference between meddling and practicing good
diplomacy is that the latter involves sticking to
bedrock principles of human rights, good governance,
and transparency and, whenever possible, underscor
ing the values that bind the country you represent to
the country in which you serve.
The Ambassador referred to the January 2019 statement by Guyana and 12 other countries from the Latin American Group in which they asserted that the Venezuelan election of 20 May 2018 lacked legitimacy as it did not include participation of all political actors in Venezuela nor were there independent international observers; and did not comply with the necessary guarantees or international standards for a free, fair and transparent election. Accordingly, the Group stated that it does not recognize the legitimacy of the new presidential term of Nicolas Maduro.
The Ambassador’s statement was in clear reference to what many observers consider double standards, inconsistency or duplicity by the Government when it stated that ‘Guyana remains a sovereign state governed by the rule of law’. The Government’s response was in relation to the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State summoning of the Guyana Ambassador to the United States to express concern about the election results and to warn that ‘any government sworn in based on flawed election results would not be legitimate. Every vote must be counted’.
Over the years, Western Nations and the international financial institutions, such as the World Bank, the IMF and the Inter-American Development Bank, have been providing Guyana with the much-needed financial support via concessional loans and grants as well as other forms of technical assistance. Only recently, the Government applied for a loan of US$5 million from the World Bank to fight the coronavirus. In order to ease the financial burden of repaying the loans as and when they are due, Guyana has benefitted enormously from not only the rescheduling of loan repayments but also the cancellation of some of its debts. For example, according to the Ministry of Finance’s 2018 End-of-Year Report, the increase in the Balance of Payments deficit was financed in part by US$58.7 million in debt forgiveness and US$17.9 in debt relief.
It appears therefore an act of ingratitude to suggest that these countries should “mind their own business” and refrain from expressing their concerns over what they believe to be attempts to thwart the will of the people to elect a government of their choice to manage the affairs of the State; and to subvert the Constitution that provides for Guyana to be a sovereign democratic State and for sovereignty to belong to the people.
Statement by former Secretary-General of ACP
Dr. Patrick Gomes, former Secretary-General of the African Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group and a Guyanese national, has issued a call to the authorities to avoid ignoring threats of sanctions by key western nations and international organisations. He asserted that ‘[t]he threats and warnings of sanctions from major powers with whom trade, development and investment must rid our country of poverty, illiteracy and inadequate health care for all Guyanese must be taken seriously and avoided’. In reference to the high-level CARICOM team that was forced to abandon its mission, Dr. Gomes stated that such a hand of friendship needed ‘to be encouraged and not appear as almost insulted…’
Results of meetings of GECOM
Following the Full Court ruling, GECOM was to have met the following day to discuss the way forward. However, the meeting was postponed at the request of the government-appointed commissioners to enable them to study the ruling. Opposition-appointed commissioners, however, contended that this was not necessary since the ruling was a simple and straight forward one that had been streamed live on the internet and reported widely in the media. Both the lawyers for GECOM Chair and the Chief Election Officer were also present in Court when the ruling was rendered. The meeting was rescheduled for Thursday.
At the rescheduled meeting of the Commission, the Chairperson voted against considering the report on the election results prepared by the Chief Election Officer, which report was compiled after taking into account the flawed results of Region 4. The Chair explained that during her contempt hearing she had given the assurance to the court to conduct a full recount of the votes cast. On Friday, the Commission agreed to a recount of all the votes cast in chronological order beginning with Region 1. However, the exercise would not commence until after the Court of Appeal ruling.
Concluding remarks
There were no problems with the tabulation of the votes cast for all the regions except Region 4. Even Region 4’s tabulation of the 421 out of 879 SOPs did not attract any adverse comments from the political parties and the international observers. One would have therefore thought that the tabulation of Region 4’s SOPs should continue from the point where the Returning Officer abandoned the exercise and replaced it with the infamous spreadsheet prepared by the staff of GECOM. However, this was not to be, as the Commission voted in favour of a full recount.
Apart from the time it would take to carry out the recount, there is likely to be significant challenges to complete the exercise, and for the final results to be declared and accepted. One government-appointed commissioner has already asserted that a recount does not mean automatic declaration of winner. To this, one may ask: Then what is the purpose of the recount? If all the political parties are satisfied with the recount results, then the winner should be declared on the basis of this. The problem is compounded by the one-month lockdown of the country due to the coronavirus. This may very well affect the commencement of the recount.
A final consideration is that should the Court of Appeal rule in favour of the APNU+AFC candidate, this will derail the entire recount exercise. In such a scenario, we are likely in for a long haul involving judicial review all the way to the Caribbean Court of Justice, as in the case of the no confidence vote of 21 December 2018. If, on the other hand, Court of Appeal rejects the application to block the recount, our sincere hope is that all the parties involved in the recount exercise will act with complete expedition, fairness and transparency to determine the winner of the elections. In this way, a new government can be formed, and the country is returned to a state of normalcy. The national interest cries out for this be done.
