Introducing biometrics without legal framework would be unconstitutional – GECOM

Jan 29, 2025 News

---

Kaieteur News- The Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) on Tuesday said that the use of biometrics at the place of polls for the upcoming General and Regional Elections requires a legislative framework failing which it would be unconstitutional.

In a statement GECOM inter alia explained that a lack of legislative framework to support the use of such technology during a national election is one of the main reasons why biometrics will not be used.

In the lengthy press release, the commission said that it has taken note of the constant publication of opposing perspectives in the media over the past week, over Chairperson of Commission, Justice (ret’d) Claudette Singh’s decision not to allow the use of biometrics at this year’s elections due to the unrealistic timelines for implementing the system.

According to GECOM, the discussion on the introduction of biometrics is centered on a motion circulated by Commissioner Vincent Alexander on November 22, 2023.

GECOM said the motion for the introduction of such technology was premised on allegations of voter impersonation at places of poll and that such a feature could serve as an additional mechanism for enhancing the system of identifying voters on Election Day.

Subsequently, GECOM explained that the issue became a prominent agenda item at the statutory meetings of the Commission and it was during those deliberations that the Chief Election Officer (CEO), Mr. Vishnu Persaud, was tasked with undertaking a feasibility study on the introduction of electronic fingerprinting at registration and biometric fingerprint identification of voters on Election Day.

The feasibility study undertaken by the CEO presented several case studies on the use of biometrics fingerprinting in other countries, and highlighted multiple technical, legislative and administrative concerns.

However, according to the Commission, it has been noted that there are multiple reports in the public sphere that appear to be examining such an important matter in isolation by only attributing prominence to the benefits of the use of biometrics without due consideration of the legal hurdle and the challenges that can be experienced.

As such, GECOM said while the CEO’s feasibility study acknowledged the benefits of biometric fingerprint identification, there were several challenges highlighted.

Among the benefits highlighted includes a high level of security, as biometrics are unique to each individual, making it difficult for fraudulent activities such as impersonation or multiple voting to occur. The use of biometrics also offers a more accurate method of voter identification compared to traditional methods like ID cards or signatures, thereby reducing the chances of errors in the electoral process, guarding against electoral fraud. It also ensures the integrity of the voting process and the use of biometric fingerprints can streamline the voter identification process, leading to faster and more efficient voting.

However, there are also several challenges to be addressed ranging from technical in which the reliability and accuracy of biometric systems have been questioned due to factors such as poor network connectivity, power outages, hardware malfunctions, and software glitches. These technical issues have led to delays in the voting process and raised concerns about the effectiveness of using biometrics for voter identification.

Inclusivity issues were also raised regarding the use of biometric fingerprint identification for voting. Certain segments of the population, such as the elderly, manual labourers, or individuals with disabilities, may face difficulties in having their fingerprints accurately scanned due to factors like worn-out fingerprints or physical impairments.

GECOM said this raises concerns about disenfranchisement and unequal access to voting rights. Legal and ethical concern particularly since questions have been raised about the legality of collecting and storing biometric data on a massive scale without robust data protection laws in place. There are also additionally ethical dilemmas that could arise concerning consent, transparency, and accountability in handling voter biometrics.

Concerns were also raised about false positives or negatives, which could lead to voter disenfranchisement or fraudulent activities if not properly addressed.

“Infrastructure challenges due to vast size and diverse population could pose infrastructure challenges for the widespread implementation of biometric voter identification.”

Further, the Commission said that “Remote areas often lacked the necessary infrastructure to support biometric technology, making it difficult to ensure universal access to this voting method. Limited access to electricity and internet connectivity in some areas hindered the effectiveness of the system.”

Operational challenges of implementing biometric technology for voting could also pose a challenge. Training election officials, maintaining equipment, and ensuring smooth operations on election days require significant resources and coordination GECOM said in its statement, while noting that the feasibility study also outlined cost implications, inadequate voter education, allegations of manipulation, resistance by political parties and public trust as challenges.

Notwithstanding the benefits and challenges of biometric technology, GECOM said that within the context of Guyana, there is no legal provision and therefore, any such introduction at the place of poll would be unconstitutional since it will impose additional conditions on a person’s right to vote.

“It was therefore against this backdrop and having considered the deliberations at the Commission that the Chairman decided that even if GECOM were to implement biometrics as a supplementary tool to identify persons, this will still require legislation since such a system would impose an additional requirement on voters and would therefore be unconstitutional.”

According to the statement, the Chairman explained her decision that notwithstanding the challenges of biometrics, it would be unrealistic for GECOM to be ready for the upcoming elections considering all the things that would be required such as: holding stakeholder consultations to determine whether GECOM should introduce biometrics; consulting with stakeholders including the government and the parliamentary political parties to determine whether it is even possible to do so now; considering things like costs and any legislative amendments necessary to cater fully for it; procurement of equipment for the introduction of biometrics in the registration process and at the place of poll; training of staff on the use of such equipment; public Guyana Elections Commission education on the introduction of these systems and how they are to be used to aid in registration and in voting.

Against this backdrop, the Commission said it is necessary for all stakeholders to be reminded that GECOM must operate within the constitutional and legislative provisions while ensuring that no voter is denied his/her constitutional right to vote.

(Introducing biometrics without legal framework would be unconstitutional – GECOM)

---

• biometrics, Chief Election Officer, feasibility study, Guyana Elections Commission, Mr. Vishnu Persaud

---