– Vincent Alexander
Opposition Commissioners at the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) say that while the body has no power to remove The New Movement’s (TNM) Asha Kissoon from Parliament, it can “stop pussyfooting” and address the issue as it relates to who is the real Leader of the List of her party and that she is illegally occupying the seat.
According to GECOM Commissioner Vincent Alexander, TNM’s Leader of the List, Gerald Forde, has been writing GECOM since January of this year, asking it to explain how, since he is Leader of the List, Kissoon was allowed to be sworn into Parliament and for them to set the record straight.
Producing documents to back up whatever position GECOM takes, Alexander says, should also be done in the interest of transparency and democracy.
“We spent most of the time on the Asha Kissoon matter with regards to Forde’s letter. The boy had written since January to GECOM and wrote again in March and keeps querying…,” Alexander told Stabroek News yesterday.
“The PPP Commissioners are pussyfooting and do not want to address it because if they address it, it will show that GECOM’s Chief Election Officer did not do a proper job in the first instance, as he accepted documentation from persons other than Forde who was Leader of the List,” he added.
Four months have passed since A New and United Guyana (ANUG) announced Kissoon’s refusal to relinquish her seat in parliament, and only when the matter was taken up on Tuesday was the release sent out by GECOM. However, it did not state that the issue was raised at its meeting but said that it was being discussed in the media.
Pointing to a letter he wrote to the Editor of the Stabroek News which appears in today’s edition, Alexander said that the public can see the genesis of the problem started and why Kissoon was sworn in and why GECOM should address the issue.
“When Asha Kissoon took up the seat in the National Assembly, it was apparent that the Speaker of the Assembly and the Chief Elections Officer of GECOM acted in good faith based on the documents presented to them, at the time. In hindsight, it may be concluded that that was not the case and that the current situation could have been avoided if the Chief Election Officer had done the necessary document checks at the time. At that time, the documentation to and from the Speaker, and the oral presentation of Kissoon, to the Chief Election Officer, identified Kenrick Morgan as the replacement for Gerald Forde as The New Movement`s representative of the list. Thus, under the signatures of the ostensible representatives of the lists of the joinder parties, Kissoon was sworn in as a member of the National Assembly for a period predetermined by the agreement among the joinder parties.,” he explained
However, when that period expired, Kissoon continued to occupy the seat to the public consternation of the other joinder parties, ANUG and LJP, and the public at large. This development led to Forde, the original representative of the TNM`s list, enquiring of GECOM about Kissoon`s illicit retention of the seat and his status in relation to his appointment as the representative of the TNM list,” he added.
Kissoon wrote to GECOM on March 24 of this year, “purporting to have communicated with GECOM on November, 2020 that Forde was no longer the TNM representative of the list.”
However, there is no evidence by GECOM`s Chief Election Officer nor is there any such document is currently in GECOM`s possession.
Alexander contends that while GECOM knows this all along, it has been putting off addressing the concerns and information sought by Forde from January to now.
“But GECOM, from January of this year to the present time, has found every reason not to respond to Forde’s question about his status. They have contended that the Speaker’s letter cited Morgan as the representative and that GECOM has no involvement beyond responding to the Speaker’s letter. They have also employed Maximum Administrative Delay in responding, even after they were persuaded by the three opposition appointed commissioners of GECOM`s obligation to advise Forde that GECOM`s records do not reflect any change of his status.”
He also charges that “more disconcerting is the fact that the documentation submitted by Kissoon in 2024, under the pretext that those documents had been submitted in 2022, ostensibly replacing Forde, do not meet the legal requirements to effect the replacement.”
“The Representation of the People Act, Chap I: 03, Section 98 of the Laws of Guyana clearly states that: “When seats have, in pursuance of Section 97, been allocated to any list of candidates –
(a) The representative of the list; of
(b) If the representative is unwilling or unable … so to do, the deputy representative of such list; or
(c) In case of any such unwillingness or inability on the part of the deputy representative, a majority of the persons named in that list may designate in writing any such person able and willing… so to do.”
It is exactly the last provision that Kissoon sought to invoke when in her letter, she contended that Forde had been replaced, however her letter only bore eight signatories, when at least twenty-two persons should have signed, as provided for in Section 11 (3) of the Representation of the People Act, Chap 1.03 of the Laws of Guyana,” Alexander notes.
It is why the opposition Commissioners believe that “GECOM is therefore in no position but to indicate to Forde that it has no basis, in any circumstance, but to continue to recognise him as the authentic representative of the list, yet the Legal Officer requires of the opposition-appointed commissioners to prove the existence of the provision quoted above and cited by Kissoon, while the chair proposes a vote on the matter, and the PPP/C appointed commissioners remain silent and/or contend that the matter is moot as Kissoon continues to occupy an illicit seat and the position of Deputy Speaker at the behest of the PPP/C and in defiance of tradition, which allows the opposition forces to determine who should be the deputy speaker.”
On Wednesday night, GECOM issued a press release saying that it had taken note of several comments and concerns in the public domain relating to the removal of Kissoon from the National Assembly and wanted the public to know that there was nothing it could do to remove her.
“It is necessary for GECOM to inform the public that the matter is actively being discussed at the level of the Commission and the outcome will be publicized upon conclusion of the discussions. In light of the most recent newspaper publication, it must be categorically stated that GECOM has absolutely no authority to remove Dr. Asha Kissoon from the National Assembly. Article 156 of the Constitution of Guyana stipulates the conditions under which a Member of Parliament can be removed from the National Assembly and there is clearly no role for GECOM in this regard,” the release said.
GECOM said that it will continue to execute its Constitutional mandate within the framework of the law.
