GECOM Commissioners reiterate concerns over handling of legal matters

May 22, 2019 News

---

Government-appointed Commissioner, Vincent Alexander, is among those who, yesterday, reiterated concerns about the handling of legal matters

pertaining to the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM).
Commenting on the issues surrounding the release of a legal opinion on GECOM’s voters’ list, which it is said expired on April 30 last, Commissioner Alexander said that it is his view that the advice comes at a bad time, given that the matter is currently under the consideration of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). Alexander also expressed concern about the manner in which GECOM‘s case before the CCJ is being handled by GECOM’s legal officer.
“I have reiterated my concerns about the manner in which the CCJ matter was handled by very same attorney, and the manner in which the legal opinion was given. It comes at a very conspicuous time, when the matter is under deliberation by the CCJ.”
Alexander claimed that the fact that GECOM is actively engaging the Court on a specific matter, the legal advice at this time can be seen as treading on the sub judice rule — a part of the law relating to contempt of court, which governs what public statements can be made about ongoing legal proceedings before, principally, the courts.
Speaking to the press, following a statutory meeting at the Commission‘s head office, Commissioner Alexander explained f

urther that although the legal opinion was sought after by Opposition-appointed commissioners, GECOM’s Chairman Justice (ret’d) James Patterson has no recollection of which date he instructed the Legal Officer and Attorney -at-law, Excellence Dazzell, to release the information.
“The opinion was purportedly given before and it is the contention of the Legal Officer that the opinion was given to the Commissioner before the list expired on April 30.”
However, Alexander noted that the Chairman himself has no recollection of when he told the Legal Officer to release that information to the Commissioners.
In addition, Alexander noted that Dazzell’s management of the case before the CCJ leads to more questions.
“The issue is that GECOM had recruited an attorney to represent the Commission and the attorney advised the Legal Officer that we should make our submissions, but she claims that there was a misinterpretation, and she advised the CCJ that we will not make any submission,” Alexander said.
GECOM is party to at least two cases before the CCJ. The first case pertains to the legality of its Chairman, who was unilaterally appointed by President David Granger, and the other matter relates to GECOM’s preparedness to hold elections in light of a ‘No Confidence Motion’ brought against the Government.
Last week, PPP Commissioner Robeson Benn defended the Legal Officer, stating that she was acting on instruction of Chairman of the Commission, when she circulated information on the expired voters’ list to the Commissioners.
Benn said that Dazzell was given the green light to forward the information to all the Commissioners about a month after the advice was prepared.
According to Benn, PPP-nominated Commissioner Bibi Shadick had requested the information on several occasions, before it was finally released to them.
Benn’s comments on the matter came hours after Government-appointed GECOM Commissioner, Desmond Trotman, criticised the legal officer over her actions, calling it deceitful.
Trotman had noted that the Commission had never collectively decided for Dazzell to release the information and called for an investigation into her reason for doing so.
However, officials attached to GECOM, including Benn, have dismissed the concerns claiming instead that the legal officer was acting within her authority.
Officials attached to GECOM contended that the legal officer, who is responsible for advising GECOM on legal matters related to the electoral process, would have indicated to the Chief Election Officer (CEO) Keith Lowenfield, before the list expired, that it needs to be updated, in accordance with her interpretation of the law.
Benn noted, too, that the position is not news to the Commissioners, since “everyone is well aware that the list must be updated through the claims and objections and continuous registration periods.”
“There was no need for a new list, as long as the active list was being updated in accordance with the law.
“Trotman and the other Government-appointed Commissioners are against the revised list. They want a new list, which is part of a tactic to delay the elections,” Benn added.
In her letter, Dazzell said based on the law, the list must be updated twice per year by adding persons who are now qualified to be registered to that list and those who are no longer qualified to be taken off that list.
In her advice, she noted that she does not see the need for a new voters’ list. “The use of the word “revise” suggests that the process is not one where a ‘new’ list is generated, but one where the most recent list is updated or amended,” she said.
“I, therefore, advise that procedures be put in place to ensure the revision of the list, otherwise the Commission would be acting in defiance of the law and may prejudice any by-election that may become necessary,” Dazzell said in the letter dated April 11, 2019.
Meanwhile, Government Commissioners have been lobbying for house-to-house registration in the lead up to the general elections. Their position is being viewed by the main political opposition, PPP, as a tactic to delay the elections.
The issue is a key element of case engaging the attention of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), the region’s highest Appeal Court.
The CCJ is preparing to hand down its decision on the validity of the December 21, 2018 ‘No-Confidence Motion’ that might necessitate early general elections.

---

---