PRO says... GECOM has no legal obligation to verify candidates’ eligibility

PRO says… GECOM has no legal obligation to verify candidates’ eligibility

Jan 08, 2020 News

Pull quote: “The onus is on the politicians themselves to ensure that they are honest on the statutory declaration form…as it stands GECOM has no legal obligation to verify the information.”

The Guyana Elections Commission, (GECOM) has laid the responsibility of ensuring that declarations made by candidates of political parties at the feet of the politicians themselves.

Yolanda Ward

Public Relations Officer Yolanda Ward explained yesterday that despite concerns over the eligibility of candidates to contest the elections arising from a court ruling which affirmed the ban on persons having dual citizenship, “the onus is on the politicians themselves to ensure that they are honest on the statutory declaration form. Ward told media operatives during a mid -day press meeting that “as it stands GECOM has no legal obligation to verify the information.”
“I understand the concerns arising out of events leading to these elections, but GECOM has to work within the confines of the law, and the law is vague as to the legal requirements of GECOM’s role in this regard. The commission has limited powers. But then again, if a candidate is not truthful in making the sworn declaration before a Commissioner of Oaths or Justice of Peace, he /she must keep this in mind that there are consequences,” she added.
The PRO was at the time responding to queries about the verification of the information supplied by candidates contesting for a seat in the National Assembly. The issue of verification came to the fore last year after a court case filed by Compton Reid, a private citizen, challenged the legitimacy of the no confidence vote of former Alliance For Change (AFC) parliamentarian Charrandass Persaud. Persaud, who also holds Canadian citizenship, was expelled after voting against his party in the House.
However in February, Chief Justice (ag) Roxane George made it clear that by swearing allegiance to another State, an MP is not eligible to be elected to serve in the National Assembly.
The court ruling reaffirmed Article 155 (1) (a) of the Constitution of Guyana which states, “No person shall be qualified for election as a member of the National Assembly who is, by virtue of his own act, under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign power or state.”
But the question of who held responsibility of verifying the information still arose. Clerk of the National Assembly Sherlock Isaacs has since noted that parliament is not mandated to check on the eligibility of politicians entering the House. He said that it is for the parties to check to ensure the persons on their list are operating within the rules of the House.
Meanwhile, Attorneys-at-law, Anil Nandlall and Sanjeev Datadin, both of whom argued the case, pointed to the consequential effects such a decision can have on other Members of the National Assembly. Both lawyers noted that the future of MPs holding dual citizenship may be uncertain.
Nandlall pointed out that in a scenario where the life of the Parliament should be extended, the decision can have dire effects for persons in that peculiar position.
“Let us assume that we have to extend the life of parliament, for whatever reason, because these ruling persons who are in that peculiar circumstance should not be sitting in the Parliament. And this has nothing to do with elections. Of course, at an election, leaders of the lists must henceforth have to ensure persons placed on those lists comply with the constitutional provisions as it relates to dual citizenship.”

Latest News