Dear Editor,
The proposed amendment to the Representation of the People Act (RoPA), if passed in its present form, would be a missed opportunity for needed reform. Its weaknesses stem partly from its very motivation. The Minister of Parliamentary Affairs and the Attorney General have stated that the aim of the reform is to avoid a recurrence of the post-election crisis events of 2020. This line has also been repeated by the media.
We all want to prevent last year’s events from happening again, but the draft reforms do not go far enough to avoid political crisis and improve the political environment. To behave as if our political problems started in March 2020 is woefully shortsighted and ill-conceived. To address the weaknesses inherent in the current RoPA, you would have to go back at least to the deadlock over the appointment of the GECOM Chairman in 2017. That process broke down completely with the then President making a unilateral choice. The Caribbean Court of Appeal later found that appointment unconstitutional and Justice Patterson was removed. For the most part, what the draft amendment does is essentially entrench a bad electoral system. Its passage at this time, instead of creating stability and progress, would set us back years. It does not even attempt to address the issues that concern the average Guyanese ‘man in the street’. People want a system that makes members of parliament accountable to citizens rather than party executives. People want less of the political polarization that divides a diverse nation into two camps and pits brother against brother and neighbour against neighbour.
One intention behind the adoption of proportional representation fifty-seven years ago was to foster a vibrant, multiparty political climate. The present RoPA frustrates that vision, and the proposed amendments do not even attempt to address this issue. People want an electoral commission with credibility and that promotes national consensus. This means that the issue of how GECOM’s commissioners are selected and function must be addressed. It is not enough to focus on the operations of the GECOM secretariat staff. People want a GECOM that is not subject to the dictates of any party and that can exercise effective and independent authority to keep parties in line on electoral matters. People want an electoral system with clear rules about campaign finance to guard against our democracy being bought or stolen. People want a system where politicians and social elites are not above the law. These ideas about what Guyanese people want for an electoral system are not just a matter of my opinion; they are based on media commentaries and recommendations that have been discussed in this country for decades.
The proposed amendment has overlooked these factors and more. In the end, all it does is to raise the penalties on malfeasance by GECOM officials. It also singles out Region Four as the misbehaving Region of the nation, which is not likely to go down well. One would expect that amendments should apply uniformly across the country. It proposes splitting Region Four up into four sections for administrative purposes but misses the opportunity to make real progress by increasing the number of constituencies and improving the accountability connection between representatives and citizens. The Government says the proposed amendment aims to prevent the recurrence of last year’s electoral crisis, but it is doubtful that it will achieve that aim because it leaves so many critical issues unaddressed.
Sincerely,
Desmond Thomas
