GECOM AND LOCAL OBSERVERS

Jul 11, 2011 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

The Guyana Elections Commission should state its position as regards Local Observers for this year’s elections. Since 1992, there have been Local Observers at our elections and while the track record of these groups is far from perfect, it is important that the average citizen and civil society be allowed to play their part in ensuring the integrity of the electoral process.
For too long we have become accustomed to external observer groups. Given our divided political environment, the assessment of foreign observers are important and will continue to be important in the foreseeable future because it is based on the findings of these observer missions that the credibility of the elections, in the eyes of the international community, often rests.
Had it not been for the Carter Center, Guyana may not have been restored to the democratic fold of nations. It was the Carter Center which not only facilitated the reforms that made free, fair and credible elections possible in 1992 but it also saved the day when its quick count, even before all the votes were tallied, indicated that the PPP was a clear winner.
The Carter Center was not here for the 1997 elections and we all know what happened then. It returned in 2001, and helped ensure that good sense prevailed just prior to its departure. After Carter left, the country took a turn for the worse when problems arose on the East Coast of Demerara.
All along, there was a local observer grouping which did some good work in the run up to the 1992 elections in validating the voters list and in 1997, when the “runners” ran away to the “Olympics”, with the verification of the results. But the local observer group lost serious credibility when it sought to engage in discussions between the contesting parties instead of simply pronouncing on its findings of the elections.
It took a Caricom Audit Team which went through every single ballot box to confirm the accuracy of the declared results and thus the credibility of the poll.
That those elections were annulled by the court had to do with the use of a voter ID cards which was deemed to be unconstitutional, something that is likely to be challenged by the ruling party whenever the appeal is heard.
In the elections 2006, there were again observers from a number of international organizations and they did coordinate the observation process amongst themselves and with the local observer mission.
It is likely again that there will be foreign observer missions to these local elections and it is also possible that the Private Sector will launch its own observer mission. It would certainly help if Guyana begins to develop the capacity to observe and pronounce on its election free from the usual partisan divisions which characterize this process.
Guyana passed an important hurdle when it held uncontested elections in 2006 and the PNCR must be credited for its conduct in the elections when it insisted that the law be complied with in announcing the results of the elections. The PNCR demonstrated its ability to make responsible choices despite the fact that having lost another election would have been hard on it.
The Guyana Elections Commission needs to make a judgment call on local observer missions. It needs to decide which local mission it will certify and what is the criteria for certification.
Local observer groups must also be mindful of letters and statements made by their principal officials which can taint public perception of the independence of those groupings. This is very important if Guyana is to develop an independent culture of monitoring elections.
It is also important that local observer missions do not abandon stations as was done in 1992 or seek to engage in negotiations with the parties as was done in 1997 without first fulfilling its mandate of pronouncing on the credibility of the elections.
Guyana is a divided country but there are thousands of good men and women who wish to play a role in ensuring that Guyana follows in the footsteps of uncontroversial elections, as was the case in 2006. These Guyanese are willing to play their part in observing elections and in so doing ensuring the integrity of the system, but they must be led by credible individuals and most importantly they must be allowed to play a role by the Guyana Elections Commission.
The Guyana Elections Commission is comprised of individuals appointed by the political parties. These persons, while sitting on GECOM, are not there as representatives of their political parties but as persons selected by the parties to sit in their professional capacities on the Commission.
They should meet and make a decision on the role of local observer missions. To do so would signal the importance they attach to these missions.

---

---