Guyana and Zimbabwe

Aug 04, 2018 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

The 2020 elections in Guyana are crucial. If those elections are disputed, then the country will never recover. That will be the end of Guyana’s oil dream.
Guyana therefore has to take note of what is presently taking place in Zimbabwe over the contested elections results. The situation in Zimbabwe today can be Guyana in 2020.
The violence in Zimbabwe, following the Aug 1st general elections, shows the controversy which can develop when the two main parties contesting the elections are evenly matched, when the election machinery is slow, and in a country which has had a history of electoral manipulation.
The opposition MDC Alliance has accepted that it was trounced in the parliamentary elections, but believes it won the Presidential elections. The ruling ZANU-PF has been declared the winner of the Presidential election by a narrow margin of votes and this has led the MDC to declare that the election results declared represents a coup against the people
There has been violence and persons have been killed. International observers have not yet pronounced on declared results. They have limited themselves to calling for peace and calm, and for the results to be officially declared.
Despite the MDC not producing any convincing evidence that the results were rigged, there still is widespread outrage in Zimbabwe over the election results.
ZANU-PF was declared the winner by 6.5% of the vote with a voter turnout of 70%. In Guyana, general and regional elections have a slightly higher turnout, yet the APNU+AFC coalition only won the 2015 general elections by less than 1%. So imagine the suspicion which is going to greet the result of the 2020 elections.
APNU+AFC has a one-seat majority in the National Assembly. It was declared the winner of the 2015 elections by the narrowest of margins, just over 4,500 votes. The PNCR, the main party in the APNU+AFC coalition, has a notorious record of shamelessly rigging elections in 1968, 1973, 1980 and in 1985, with the direct assistance of the military. This is a toxic mixture for a small country like Guyana with a history of polarized voting.
Elections in Guyana are fraught with suspicion. Even if the APNU+AFC coalition loses in 2020, their supporters are going to feel aggrieved. When the two sides are so evenly matched, the results are close, and against the background of past election rigging, there is bound to be suspicion of cheating.
It is for this reason that political parties and civil society should convene a caucus to initiate confidence-building measures in the electoral process.
Former US President Jimmy Carter has been urging dialogue, because he recognizes the dangers to Guyana should the PNCR rig the 2020 elections. The PPPC and the President have committed to dialogue, with the President proposing they discuss security, the environment and oil and gas.
Any discussion should be first about elections. Once there is controversy over elections, there will be instability, the Green State Development Strategy will become history and ExxonMobil will put their investment on hold. Exxon will not operate in an unstable and undemocratic environment. This will result in the deferral of Guyana’s oil riches. Venezuela will try to exploit the situation by inviting ExxonMobil back to their country which has the world’s largest oil reserves.
Confidence-building on elections is therefore urgent. The talks should include establishing ways in ensuring first the production of a credible and acceptable election list. There should be random testing of the list to ensure there are no duplications, phantoms or under-aged persons registered.
Second, confidence needs to be restored in the Guyana Elections Commission. A frank discussion on GECOM is needed, because this is machinery that will conduct the elections and the employment practices are already creating suspicion, especially given the President’s unilateral appointment of a Chairperson.
Third, there is need for an independent local body to oversee the elections. This body should have polling agents at every polling station, and its ‘scrutineers’ should be given access to the statements of poll so that there can be system of independent verification of the declared elections results.
The Elections Affairs Bureau (EAB) which previously performed this function has been an abject failure. It was unable to muster the manpower to monitor all polling stations. This is where civil society can play a role. A civil society grouping should be formed to monitor the elections and should begin to raise funds from international organizations to verify the voters’ list and to monitor the polls. Otherwise, we are looking for trouble.

---

---