The EU presents the recommendations of the 2020 Elections, today
European Union, Fernando Ponz-Canto, (right) when he handed over a copy of the Final Report of the European Union Observer Mission to Justice (retired) Claudette Singh, Chair of the Guyana Elections Commission9
Kaieteur News – Chief Observer of the European Union Election Observer (EU EOM), Urmas Paet, plans to meet the media today, at the Arthur Chung Conference Center (ACCC), Liliendaal. During this engagement, the observer’s mission will make recommendations, which will be included in the Mission’s final report on March 2020 General and Regional Elections.
According to the EU report, released in June 2020, there are a total of 26 detailed proposals for electoral reform, with eight listed as a priority.
These are:
1. Review and consolidate piecemeal electoral legislation to strengthen legal clarity and certainty.
2. Launch a national consultation process to overhaul the constitution and operation of the Elections Commission, specifically to ensure a more inclusive representation of the various components of Guyanese society and political spectrum.
3. To develop, in a consultation process, effective legislation to regulate political finance, having regard to the principles of equality, transparency and accountability. Such legislation could provide transparency in campaign income and establish reasonable limits for campaign spending as well as effective disclosure and reporting requirements and sanctions. Consideration may also be given to establishing an independent supervisory body.
4. Introduce a legal and regulatory system that transforms state-owned media into a legitimate public service broadcaster. This includes provisions that allow editorial independence, financial autonomy, clear separation from any governmental organization, and the open and competitive selection process of its board members.
5. In order to foster transparency and accountability in online and offline campaigning, policymakers could consider introducing detailed reporting requirements for those who paid for sponsored materials as well as for those who received payments. To enable voters to easily distinguish between paid advertising and other information, any campaign-sponsored sponsored material should be clearly labeled to indicate who paid for it.
6. Adopt clear written procedures for the transmission and tabulation of election results, specifically to ensure consistency of process in each region, adequate tracking of electoral documents transmitted, and the possibility for all authorized stakeholders to inspect SOPs as required by law.
7. Incorporate into law the obligation to accompany any declaration of results by publishing at the same time detailed polling station results and digital copies of all SOPs. In addition to the number of valid votes cast for each candidate list, these detailed results should also include all elements of electoral accounting to allow control of their coherence, such as the number of registered voters; voters who voted; rejected votes; spoiled votes; and so forth.
8. Establish a comprehensive election dispute resolution system to ensure effective and timely remedies throughout all stages of the election process.
The opening paragraph of the report summary goes straight to what expands into a 64-page devotional critique of some aspects of the process.
“General and regional elections were held on 2 March in a deeply polarized environment” the report begins, “Legal uncertainty, unregulated political funding, biased state media and a lack of transparency in the administration of elections characterized ‘ context before the election, but elections were generally competitive and competitors could campaign freely. Voting, counting and tabulating the results in nine of Guyana’s ten regions were generally well managed. However, the integrity of the entire electoral process was severely compromised by the non-transparent and unbelievable tables of results in the largest and definite Region 4 by senior officials of the Guyana Election Commission, acting in violation of the law and the orders of the High Court issued. in this respect. ”
Set against a background of the events leading up to the elections, including the No Confidence Vote and the subsequent legal battle, the report places the ultimate blame for the current impasse squarely at the feet of GECOM.
“By failing to take decisive action,” the report notes, “as the electoral process escalated into chaos and illegality, GECOM abdicated its constitutional duty to take all necessary steps to ensure that any of its officers comply with the law, despite express powers to remove and exercise disciplinary control over them. ”
The report also notes that the elections are ethnically polarized with Partnership for National Unity + Alliance for Change representing predominantly Afro-Guyanese and People’s Progressive / Civic Party (PPP / C) representing Indo- Mostly Guyanese. The report noted that the two main political groups had significant funds at their disposal, with no concern about the transparency of campaign finance with the implicit intent of GECOM.
“With the consent of the main competitors,” the report noted, “GECOM did not assume its supervisory responsibility to monitor campaign finance. Several parties spoke about improving finance regulations, highlighting the need for reforms in this area. ”
Although the report noted considerable bias in the privately owned Guyana Times, which favored the PPP / C, and the state-owned Guyana Chronicle, which favored the government, he noted that “Stabroek News and Kaieteur News have proved to be fairly balanced in their news. attention. ”