‘Elections skulduggery’

Aug 12, 2024 Letters

Dear Editor

Elections rigging, is using‘illegitimate and undemocratic means of tilting the playing field clearly in the favour of one party or candidate at the expense of others.’ Since it involves human beings, a level of elections skulduggery is to be expected and the following categories have been identified: gerrymandering, vote buying, repression, denying media access, intimidating supporters of other parties, digital hacking, stuffing ballot boxes, multiple voting and duping the international community. Nicholas Cheeseman and Brian Klass claim that to be safe, elections are best rigged long before elections day, by which time only four main rigging options are available. Two– multiple and illegitimate voting – can be deployed while voting occurs and two –stuffing ballot boxes and tampering with the counting process – come into play once voting has taken place. ‘These four strategies have one thing in common, … they can only work if the electoral commission is involved’(Nicholas Cheeseman and Brian Klaas (2018) How to Rig an Election.  Yale University Press).

The British colonialists rigged elections against the Peoples’ Progressive Party (PPP) and were prepared to tolerate the Peoples’ National Congress (PNC) of Forbes Burnham doing so because they considered – and now the evidence that they were correct has become public – that the PPPconstituted a threat to the international liberal democratic order. From the Western standpoint, which I share, under no circumstances should majority rule – ‘democracy’ – particularly one rooted in a stable ethnic allegiance, have been allowed to undermine the liberal order. In mitigation of its intended behaviour, at the independence discussions the British rulers offer shared governance, but the PPP, perhaps because, unknowing to the Guyana population, it had already made written commitments to take Guyana in the dictatorial Stalinist communist alliance, refused. Immediately upon the fall of Soviet communism, the West supported free and fair elections, and these brought the PPP to government.

But Guyana’s ethnic configuration then turned its destructive power internally. Once added to a competitive democratic environment, a different kind of political disorder arose that, although solvable, the local political elite has to date been unable to resolve. Instead, they have been practising and accusing each other of all manner of ethnic atrocities: extra-judicial killings, subversion, discrimination, electoral manipulations, etc.

This is the operational context in which, with the 2025 elections in mind, a few days ago the Alliance For Change (AFC) ‘expressed dissatisfaction with the integrity of the electoral system, especially as it pertains to the voters list’ and called upon the chairperson of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) ‘to provide a comprehensive update on the measures being implemented to improve the system… [and]assure the nation that the current system will inspire public confidence in the 2025 elections’ (SN: 03/08/2024).

The party noted that the bloated voters list has ‘contributed in no small part to the resulting stand-off,’ i.e. the 2020 elections dispute now before the courts, of which the PPP is making the kind of huge political song and dance that has plagued this country since the return to ‘democracy’ in 1992. The AFC implored GECOM to stay within the law but in seeking to support the status quo, in its response GECOM sought to pass the buck by taking refuge in ‘the law’ and the ineptitude of its directorate.

For example, ‘the introduction of biometrics requires legislative changes and, until such is enabled, GECOM cannot proceed with implementing such a feature’. When it comes to updating the electoral list, GECOM cannot update the national register of registrants database (NRRDB)or any list extracted therefrom except by way of the existing legal provisions. Then, a ‘motion on the introduction of biometrics was discussed by the Commission and a decision taken to conduct a feasibility study  … The feasibility study has since been completed and copies have been circulated to all members of the Commission.’  The Commission informed that it routinely updates the NRRDB by the very routine methods – claims, objections, or continuous registration exercises – that AFC and others have found insufficient!

Assessing the legally truncated partial house-to-house registration that was done by GECOM in 2019, the European Union (EU) Final report recommended a thorough update of the decade-old register well ahead of the next election cycle, based on inclusive consultations and political consensus. At the same time ensure greater effectiveness of the ‘continuous’ registration system by improving access – both in terms of geographical spread of registration offices and duration of the registration periods.’ The Caribbean Community 2020 recount group suggested that such a cleaning of the list should be the minimum condition before the 2025 elections.

Rigging elections by way of a bloated list’ has now become the modus operandi in Guyana and is the major reason why only just over 20% of the population is certain they are not manipulated. Notwithstanding, the PPP’s protestations to the contrary, from his own experiences in ‘How the PPP and GECOM rigged the 2011 elections,’ Malcolm Harripaul (Commentary 12/02/2011) provided the following examples of PPP behaviour that fits well with the categorisation above. Multiple voting, buying votes, PPP control of GECOM, GECOM creating obstacles to polling agents, polling places located at the homes of PPP supporters, phantom voting, ballot box tampering, PPP demanding recounts and GECOM secured ballot boxes. Please spare me the nonsense about foreign monitors certifying elections. There are many examples of the courts rejecting results after they were certified by such monitors and of the monitors acting in their own national self-interest!

During the 2020 elections process the chairperson of GECOM, having requested and received reports from the relevant state officials about elections skulduggery, concluded that they were of sufficient import to come by way of an election petition. The former GECOM Chief Elections Officer claimed that there were some 4,686 impersonations and other irregularities.  In 2013, the court in Moldavia overturned a certified election when it found that 5,623 ineligible persons had voted. But it appears that Guyanese will not now receive the judicial adjudication GECOM recommended.

The EU election follow-up mission of 2023 reported that the present electoral list remains problematical and that the ‘opposition is advocating that a new voter register be compiled through house-to-house registration combined with electronic capture of fingerprints, as well as advocating the introduction of biometric (fingerprint) verification of voters at polling places. The PPP/C government, on the other hand, prefers to improve the existing voter register through extended continuous registration and somewhat improved procedures for the removal of deceased registrants.’ We shall see if the opposition will go to, and hope to win an election with the current list because the PPP does not want it changed!

The AFC requested recommendations from GECOM but GECOM passed the buck, and this indicates that the political elite has much work to do. ‘The freedom of a people largely depends upon its vigilance in designing, establishing and reforming its governance mechanisms to keep the political establishment in check. However, the political context is, more or less, opportunistic and even the most well thought through arrangements may prove inadequate for this task. To meet this eventuality, a people need to always keep its power dry’ (‘A people must keep its powder dry,’ (SN: 02/07/2014).’

Regards
Dr. Henry Jeffrey

• Dr Henry Jeffrey, GECOM, GECOM Chief Elections, NRRDB, PPP demanding