Latest update May 12th, 2024 12:59 AM
Oct 22, 2014 News
By Abena Rockcliffe
As he admitted that other jurisdictions around the world with populations many times Guyana’s receive elections
results way faster, Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), Dr. Steve Surujbally hinted that the body will be looking to be much more efficient in the timely delivery of election results this time around.
The Chairman spoke about this at the recent conclusion of a two-day media and elections training for journalists organized by the High Commission of Canada and Guyana Press Association.
At that forum, Dr. Surujbally told local journalists about the need to investigate stories, look beyond the surface of things, research and get the real story or, in some cases, the story behind the story.
He referred to comments made by an experienced journalist as it relates to the role of a member of the press in putting pressure on individuals or entities to get the best out of them. The veteran journalist was essentially encouraging young journalists to practice proactive and investigative journalism.
“If GECOM gave results in three days in 2006 then two and a half days in 2011, why not in two and a half hours… he (the veteran journalist) was right. We should be thinking how to get it in less than two and a half days; I don’t know, maybe in 2 and a half hours we might get it,” said Dr. Surujbally.
The Chairman made note that he recently returned from Brazil elections in which 140 million voters took part, yet the results were delivered within three hours.
He noted, however, that while GECOM should be looking at methodologies to deliver results faster, it must be considered that the systems in Guyana are quite different.
He gave the example that if everything else is accurate but “someone messes up in Lethem, the poor Chief Elections Officer cannot go on the stage and declare results because it will be incorrect.”
Dr. Surujbally explained that in such a case everything will have to be rechecked and that has to be done in the presence of the presiding officer, deputy clerk and political party agents “and these things take time.”
The Chairman also made mention of the terrain in Guyana and pointed out that it can be difficult to carry ballot boxes in floods as well as to and from areas with no airstrips. Yet, he said that these constraints do not negate the fact that better can be done and journalists have the right to seek betterment.
Back in 2011, Dr. Surujbally had promised that he would have put his best into getting better systems in place so as to ensure elections results can be delivered in a timely manner.
He had said, “Accordingly, I hereby give a commitment that I will try my utmost to pursue an initiative for a pilot project to carry out a comparative voting system when we embark on the preparations for local government elections next year. And I need your collective support on the matter.”
The Commission had incurred the wrath of many stakeholders including political parties contesting the elections, and international groups for the delay in releasing the final results.
In fact, it took GECOM nearly 72 hours after the closing of polls to provide an anxious populace with the results, fuelling speculations of skullduggery and complicity.
As he defended the delay in releasing the final results of the 2011 National Elections, the GECOM Chairman said that the Commission has held fast to its mandate and to the laws that govern its actions and methodology, and has delivered a result that can withstand scrutiny, “even in the face of flak from an uncomprehending and sometimes, unsympathetic public.”
The GECOM Chairman noted that elections “are arguably the single most important tile in the complex mosaic of democracy and that is why the stakeholders must at all times try to get it right”.
He explained that in light of this, the results, which were derived from the elections that were conducted in accordance with international best practices, must be absolutely accurate and unchallengeable.
However, Dr. Surujbally urged that the nation think about the alternative if the Elections Commission did not pursue the path that it did.
“If we were to make unsubstantiated and incorrect declarations, the possible repercussive effects could be hideous and too tragic to even contemplate.”
“Certainly we could have accepted telephone calls throughout the night of November 28th, relaying the results, as some people had suggested… we would have made the necessary calculations based on the information received from the presiding officers by phone and…the results are declared on the 29th, and then those who are saying that we took too long would be very happy. Apart from being in contravention of the laws associated with the declaration of results, that would have been a recipe for disaster,” Surujbally stated.
The procedure for the receipt and compilation of the results of the elections prescribes that when the individual statements of polls are received at the GECOM Command Centre from their respective polling stations, they have to be checked for accuracy.
Then, the results delineated on the statements of poll have to be double checked with those in the possession of the respective returning officers, thus ensuring that they collectively represent the totality of the results of the balloting which were conducted at the various polling stations within the particular districts.
“If an error is detected, the process for that district cannot and will not go forward,” Dr. Surujbally emphasised.
Listen how to run an oil country
May 12, 2024
– GCF yet to respond to concerns regarding race course By Rawle Toney Kaieteur Sports – Some of the country’s leading cyclists are considering boycotting the National Sports...By Anasa Williams Kaieteur News – Millicent Mary Frank was born on May 11, 1924, at Lot 103 Leopold Street, Werk-en-Rust,... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Is it ever justifiable for journalism to fan the flames of geopolitical tension? This question arises... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]