Latest update August 27th, 2026 10:20 AM
Latest News
- GGMC puts out ad begging for donations of used clothes, shoes for residents in gold rich communities
- Food prices fuel Guyana’s inflation
- Mohamed released on $100K bail after river standoff with joint services
- Iran, Oman still working on Strait of Hormuz accord – senior Iranian source
- U.S-based pandit accused of using ‘spiritual ritual’ in new sexual assault case
Chairing GECOM
DEAR EDITOR,
There is really little to cheer about all the passionate discussion on the Chair of GECOM; for all the expert observers have (in) conveniently overlooked the recommendation made in 2006 by the Carter Center Observer Mission to the General Elections.
The Carter Center Mission, in recommending the discontinuance of the current political management framework, made reference to models in the Commonwealth which function more effectively, and consequently enjoy much more credibility.
The Mission recommended a new structure to be managed by recognisably qualified professionals, as obtains in Barbados, Jamaica and Canada, for example; and for a specific term of office. Following are extracts from ‘Recommendations to be addressed’.
“Reforming GECOM
a) GECOM should be independent from the government and be accountable to and receive funding from the National Assembly. The independence of GECOM from the Government’s administration will bolster the Commission’s credibility and independence.
b) The Carter-Price formula for GECOM should be changed to ensure that GECOM is not divided solely along political lines:
1) GECOM should be composed of individuals who are solely committed to carrying out a successful and transparent election process, and who have the confidence of political parties, but who can also maintain independence. As noted in the Carter Center’s report on the 2001 elections, ‘as part of the electoral reform efforts, Guyana should give careful consideration to alternative models, possibly reducing or eliminating political party representation and increasing the role of civil society and professional experts’.”
That since 2006 such a recommendation was neither comprehensively debated, or a conclusive decision made at the highest levels of the contending parties, can be regarded as a dereliction of duty to the citizenry, who should still insist on their constitutional right to be part of such a critical decision-making process.
Perhaps now is the time for ANUG to play a leading role in this reformation.
Yours faithfully
E.B John
Share this:
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Similar Articles
hits
Blunt of the day
Sports
Features/Columnists
Sir. Ronald Sanders
The GHK Lall Column
Weekend Cartoon
