GECOM provides clarification on matters raised by WIN

See full statement from the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM):

The Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) considers it necessary to provide clarification concerning the matters raised publicly by the We Invest in Nationhood (WIN) Party in relation to the appointment of scrutineers and the Commission’s involvement in that process, as well as the issue of nomination and appointment of Members of the Commission.

GECOM recognizes the legitimate public interest in these matters and considers it important that all stakeholders, including political parties, candidates, electors and the wider public, be fully informed of the circumstances and the respective roles and responsibilities of the parties involved.

It necessary to place on record that the Chief Election Officer has, at all times, responded to correspondence received from the WIN Party with alacrity, accuracy, specificity and professionalism. Each matter has been addressed in accordance with the statutory authority vested in the Chief Election Officer and the limitations imposed upon that office by law.

Appointment of Scrutineers

GECOM confirms that it is presently remunerating 69 scrutineers appointed by A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) under the existing arrangement for the payment of scrutineers on behalf of the combined opposition political parties.

The existence of this arrangement should not, however, be interpreted as a determination by GECOM that the WIN Party or any other opposition political party is not entitled to representation. The issue concerning the appointment of scrutineers arose following correspondence between the Leader of the Opposition and the Chief Election Officer regarding the submission of a proposed list of scrutineers pursuant to Section 33D of the Representation of the People Act, Cap. 1:03.

Upon receipt of the proposed list, the Chief Election Officer expressly communicated that he could not unilaterally act upon or implement the submission. This position is grounded in Section 7A of the Representation of the People Act, as amended by Act No. 25 of 2022, which provides:

“The Chief Election Officer shall, notwithstanding anything in any written law, be subject to the direction and control of the Commission.”

Accordingly, the Chief Election Officer does not possess independent authority to alter an existing arrangement or implement a new list where the matter falls within the jurisdiction of the Commission and requires its direction or determination.

 The Consultation Process

It is particularly important to clarify that GECOM has not determined that the consultation process undertaken by the Leader of the Opposition was invalid, inadequate or otherwise deficient.

Section 33D(2) of the Representation of the People Act provides for the submission by the Leader of the Opposition of the list of scrutineers to be paid by the Commission on behalf of the combined opposition political parties, following meaningful consultation with the other opposition parties represented in the National Assembly.

The Leader of the Opposition submitted correspondence dated June 3, 2026, together with supporting documentation relating to the consultation undertaken and the proposed appointments. Subsequently, the Chief Election Officer received correspondence from APNU formally objecting to the proposal and disputing, among other matters, whether meaningful consultation had taken place concerning the allocation and nomination of scrutineers.

The existence of these competing positions did not result in a determination by the Chief Election Officer that the consultation was inadequate.

Indeed, by letter dated June 5, 2026, the Chief Election Officer expressly advised the Leader of the Opposition that he was not vested with authority to determine whether meaningful consultation, as contemplated by Section 33D(2), had occurred. He further explained that competing positions advanced by parliamentary opposition parties regarding the consultation process were matters for the parties concerned to address and resolve.

The relevant correspondence and supporting documentation submitted by the Leader of the Opposition, together with the correspondence received from APNU, were accordingly placed on the official record relating to the appointment of scrutineers until such time as the matter is dealt with conclusively by the Commission.

The Chief Election Officer subsequently reiterated this position in his letter dated June 10, 2026, emphasizing that, pursuant to Section 7A, he is subject to the direction and control of the Commission and therefore cannot independently act on matters falling within the Commission’s jurisdiction.

It is therefore factually incorrect to suggest that GECOM determined that the WIN Party’s interests or nominations were rejected based on an adverse finding concerning the consultation process. No such finding was made by the Chief Election Officer.

The Role of the Chief Election Officer

GECOM considers it important that the distinction between the administrative role of the Secretariat and the statutory authority of the Commission be clearly understood.

The Chief Election Officer is required to operate within the authority conferred by law and, pursuant to Section 7A of the Representation of the People Act, is expressly subject to the direction and control of the Commission.  Consequently, where a matter requires consideration or determination by the Commission, the Chief Election Officer cannot substitute his own decision for that of the Commission.  This is not a refusal to act. It is compliance with the law governing the office of the Chief Election Officer. 

The Chief Election Officer has consistently maintained this position in his correspondence with the relevant stakeholder and has done so in a manner that is factual, professional and institutionally neutral.

Nomination of Opposition Commissioners

GECOM also wishes to clarify that it has no locus standi in relation to the nomination by the Leader of the Opposition of persons for appointment as Members of the Guyana Elections Commission. 

The nomination and appointment of Commissioners are matters governed by Article 161(3)(b) of the Constitution. GECOM is not the authority vested with responsibility for determining the validity of such nominations or appointments.

Accordingly, the Commission cannot properly intervene in, adjudicate upon, or resolve any impasse concerning persons nominated by the Leader of the Opposition for appointment as Commissioners.

Local Government Elections

With respect to the conduct of Local Government Elections, GECOM confirms that its Secretariat has prepared and has a comprehensive Workplan for the conduct of the elections. 

The Workplan identifies the activities and tasks required for the preparation and conduct of the elections.

However, the Secretariat cannot independently activate and implement the Workplan. The commencement of the electoral programme requires the necessary decision and direction of the Commission.

Once activated, the timelines contained in the Workplan may also require adjustment depending on the date of activation and the prevailing operational circumstances.

The existence of a Workplan therefore demonstrates that the Secretariat has undertaken the necessary planning and preparatory work. Its implementation, however, is dependent upon the Commission exercising its statutory functions and providing the requisite direction.

GECOM’s Commitment to Transparency

GECOM considers it essential that public discussion concerning electoral matters be based upon complete and accurate circumstances.

The Commission therefore wishes to emphasize that:

1. GECOM is currently remunerating 69 scrutineers appointed by APNU+AFC under the existing arrangement.
2. GECOM has not determined that the WIN Party is excluded from representation or that its proposed nominees are unacceptable.
3. The Chief Election Officer has not determined that the consultation conducted by the Leader of the Opposition was invalid or inadequate.
4. The Chief Election Officer has consistently responded to correspondence from the WIN Party with alacrity, accuracy, specificity and professionalism.
5. The Chief Election Officer cannot independently determine or implement matters that fall within the jurisdiction of the Commission without the Commission’s direction or control.
6. GECOM has no authority to adjudicate upon the nomination of persons by the Leader of the Opposition for appointment as Commissioners.
7. The GECOM Secretariat has prepared a Workplan for the conduct of Local Government Elections, but its activation requires action by the Commission.

GECOM remains committed to transparency, accountability, inclusivity, impartiality and strict adherence to the Constitution and electoral legislation.

The Commission further considers it in the public interest that all stakeholders have a complete understanding of the circumstances surrounding these matters and of the respective responsibilities of the political parties, the Chief Election Officer, the Secretariat and the Commission.

GECOM will continue to discharge its responsibilities within the authority conferred upon it by law and will remain committed to ensuring the effective, transparent and credible administration of Guyana’s electoral processes.