Latest update April 7th, 2025 6:08 AM
Political parties failed to submit 2020 elections expense reports
…Article 13 presses GECOM to ensure compliance with regulations
Chief Elections Officer, Mr. Vishnu Persaud
Kaieteur News – New Chief Election Officer (CEO) at the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), Vishnu Persaud, has said that he has not located any expense report from political parties that contested the 2020 General and Regional Elections.
Persaud is reported to have explained to civil society organization, Article 13 that he searched his office after being appointed, but could not find any such documents. Article 13 in a letter to this publication expressed its disappointment of the response from the Chief Election Officer, since it said that the Chairman of at least one political group, A New and United Guyana (ANUG) which contested the 2020 elections, is on public record as stating that the party did submit an election expense report.
As such, Article 13 opined that this occurrence should not be taken lightly by the CEO. “Even if only one report was submitted, that information should have been gazetted as the law requires. As the nation engages in a debate on electoral reform, it is important that the Chief Election Officer play his part in ensuring that the law is observed and violators are sanctioned,” the group said.
It added: “…hitherto, there has been a conspiracy at the level of GECOM to ignore the election expense report requirement of the Representation of the People Act. GECOM Chair, Justice Claudette Singh, confirmed this in a letter to one of our members that GECOM had taken a decision not to operationalise that requirement of the Act…”
To this end, the civil society body, comprising members such as Chartered Accountant and Attorney-at-Law, Christopher Ram said it would be disappointed if the Chief Election Officer joined in undermining the elections Act.
Article 13 said that Mr. Persaud in his response to the group by a letter dated March 11th, explained that he had carried out extensive search in his Office and could not find any election expense report from the 2020 elections. Further to this, the Chief Elections Officer reportedly told the civil society body that there is no provision within the Representation of the People Act which empowers the Chief Election Officer to compel any agent of any political party to fulfill their statutory obligation. However he said that a more “considered response would be provided when the recently appointed Legal Officer assumes office.”
Article 13 wrote to Persaud since December 14 last year to congratulate him on his appointment and had also taken the opportunity to raise the issue of election expenses report. In the letter, the civil group said it had drawn Persaud’s attention to sections 108 and 109 of the Representation of the People Act, described in the letter as a “limited form of election finance regulation.”
“Our letter expressed the hope that even though some action and non-action would have taken place before Mr. Persaud’s appointment, that “he would take all steps necessary to ensure that the law is observed.”
Specifically, Article 13 had requested the names of political parties and their agents that have and have not submitted the Election expenses and declaration report required under section 108 of the elections Act. It also said, “In the case of non-compliance, particulars of any application made by any election agent under section 110 of the Act which provides for the High Court “to make an order allowing an authorised excuse for the failure to submit the return or any declaration as the case may be or for any error or a false statement therein, as the court seems just.”
In addition, the group requested the date proposed by the CEO, for the publishing of the election expenses return in the Gazette and the time and place at which these returns and accompanying documents and election expense declarations can be inspected since the public has a right to inspect these documents up to two years after their receipt by the Chief Election Officer. Lastly, Article 13 asked the CEO what steps he propose to take against any person for non-compliance with the section which constitutes an “illegal practice” under s. 108 (5) of the Act.”
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
Anticipation without preparation
Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- The Vice President of Guyana, ever the sagacious observer of the inevitable, has reassured... more
The U.S. “Joining” the Commonwealth: an unreasonable expectation
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- Recent media stories have suggested that King Charles III could “invite” the United... more
Weekend Cartoon
