Yesterday’s meeting of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) was aborted after two opposition-nominated commissioners walked out in protest at the decision to entertain motions of dismissal against Chief Election Officer Keith Lowenfield, Deputy Chief Election Officer Roxanne Myers and District Four Returning Officer Clairmont Mingo.
Though Commissioner Charles Corbin remained in the absence of Commissioners Vincent Alexander and Desmond Trotman, the Commission meeting lacked the necessary two opposition-nominated members for a quorum.
The decision on the way forward now lies with Chairperson Justice (ret’d) Claudette Singh who can within two days reconvene the meeting and proceed with only the government Commissioners present.
This is according to Article 226 of the Constitution which specifies that a quorum for a meeting of the Commission shall be the Chairman and not less than four members of the Commission – two each appointed by the President and the Opposition respectively. If at any stage of a duly summoned meeting, a quorum is not present due to the absence of members without good cause to be determined by the Chairman then the meeting is to be adjourned for two calendar days. It continues that if at the adjourned meeting there is still no quorum, then the members present, being not less than four members including the Chairman, shall be deemed to be a quorum and any decision made at any such adjourned meeting shall be valid and binding.
Speaking with Stabroek News following yester-day’s meeting, Alexander maintained that he would not be present for the debate of any motion since such action would be patently unfair.
“The proponents are biased,” he maintained, adding that there are no circumstances in which he would participate in such a debate.
“If the Chair decides to proceed it will be without my participation,” he concluded.
Government-nominated Commissioner Sase Gunraj also said that the matter now lies in the hands of the Chair.
He explained that yesterday’s meeting actually discussed several matters before the Opposition-nominated Commissioners decided to exit in a move that he said has become the norm.
“It is something that we have been accustomed to. Every time an issue they don’t find favour with is to be discussed they walk out. It is now apparent that they are in favour of the continuation of these persons in GECOM’s employ. Their words and their actions make this clear,” Gunraj stated.
Notably a walkout has been used by both sides of the Commission to prevent discussion on matters of controversy.
The motions were to be debated at the GECOM meeting of July 13 but this was postponed to yesterday as commissioners were not in possession of the employment contracts of Lowenfield and Myers.
Motions for the dismissal of the three officers Lowenfield, Myers and Mingo have been before the Commission since June 1.
They allege that during the 2020 General and Regional Elections the officers acted in a manner which has caused a loss of public confidence and public trust in the electoral process citing 14 specific instances of supposed failure to perform statutory functions.
The trio is also facing criminal charges that were instituted as a result of alleged misconduct during the post-voting process.
In response to the motion, Singh had requested that each person show cause why they should not be dismissed and in the case of Myers received a response which contends that no evidence has been provided to support any accusation that she acted unlawfully or failed to perform her statutory function.
Myers has challenged the Commissioners calling for her dismissal to provide any such evidence rather than rely on “on conjecture, innuendo and unsubstantiated allega-tion”.
She further contended that in the absence of a formal independent inquiry that includes all GECOM officials, election officers and staff into what occurred during the elections and an investigation into the GECOM Command Centre riot, no one could rightly impute any unlawful action on her part or breach of statutory functions with or relating to the conduct of these elections
Lowenfield meanwhile has approached the High Court to have Gunraj and Bibi Shadick barred from deliberating on his employment. He contends that since the complaint had been filed by Gunraj and Shadick, their participation in the process of how the Commission ought to proceed, would result in bias and breach the rules of natural justice.
Lowenfield, Myers and Mingo are all currently on annual leave pending the decision of the Commission.
