A much-anticipated meeting of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) to debate motions for the dismissal of the Chief Election Officer (CEO), Deputy Chief Election Officer (DCEO) and Returning Officer for Region 4 did not happen.
It has been postponed to next week.
According to Commissioner Sase Gunraj the delay occurred because Commissioners are still not in possession of the contracts of employment for the two senior officers.
“At the last meeting contracts of employment for the CEO and DCEO were requested. Up to this point those contracts have not been provided and it was felt that no proper debate could ensue before commissioners had had a chance to study those contracts,” Gunraj explained.
Asked if a copy of these contracts were not stored at the Commission’s secretariat Gunraj said he was unaware.
A source who wished not to be named has indicated to Stabroek News that efforts to source copies from the secretariat proved futile and the Chairperson Justice (ret’d) Claudette Singh had actually requested copies from the officers themselves on Monday.
This latest delay comes days after CEO Keith Lowenfield approached the High Court in an attempt to bar Gunraj and fellow government nominated-commissioner Bibi Shadick from voting on the motion for his dismissal.
According to a fixed date application filed by Lowenfield against the GECOM, his contract of employment provides for two bases for termination of services–either via a three-month notice or without notice for “gross misconduct” providing that the CEO is given written notice setting out clearly the reason for termination and giving the CEO an opportunity to respond.
On June 1, following the tabling of a motion for immediate dismissal by Gunraj, Lowenfield was asked by the GECOM Chair to show cause why he should not be removed from his position as CEO.
The motion accused Lowenfield of acting in a manner which has caused a loss of public confidence and public trust in the electoral process. He was also accused of discarding his oath of office and failing to act fairly and impartially or legally in the discharge of his duties.
According to the CEO’s High Court application, he responded to this request in writing and is entitled via his terms of employment and the rules of natural justice to a fair hearing, including the right not to have the complainants participate as adjudicators in the hearing of their own complaint against him.
The issue of bias on the part of the government-nominated commissioners was first raised by opposition-nominated commissioner Vincent Alexander, who called for an independent tribunal to be established to adjudicate the matter in GECOM’s stead.
Singh voted against Alexander’s proposal and scheduled the motion’s debate for July 12. Additionally the Commission unanimously decided to send the three officers on annual leave until the matter was settled.
Both Shadick and Gunraj had told Stabroek News that they did not expect the Court filing to impact the debate since no injunction had been granted.
