The results of the General and Regional Elections held on 2nd March 2020 were not declared until 2nd August – after a period of 153 days. This unusual delay was a result of the ‘Holladar effect’ which commenced in the High Court of Guyana and concluded in the Caribbean Court of Justice.
Former President David Granger speaking on the programme – The Public Interest – explained that the ‘Holladar effect’ was the result of a sequence of court rulings aimed at deliberately displacing the Elections Commission as the authority for determining the outcome of elections, deterring the presentation of legitimate declarations of results, disrupting the electoral process and, thereby, defeating the expression of the will of the electorate.
Mr. Granger pointed out that the ‘Holladar effect’ combined peaceful procedures in the courts with rowdy protests in the streets. The People’s Progressive Party (PPP), which was in Opposition at that time, created an atmosphere of intimidation and insecurity at the office of the Returning Officer of Electoral District No. 4 in order to interrupt the functions of the Elections Commission.
The Returning Officer declared the results for that electoral district but an elector applied to the High Court on 5th March to prevent the publication of those results and the presentation of the Report by the Chief Election Officer which would have enabled an official declaration. The Court granted an injunction and a marshal accompanied by politicians and a mob stormed the Elections Commission Command Centre and served the Court’s order on the Chief Election Officer. PPP mobs then unleashed a spate of simultaneous assaults on unsuspecting school children, citizens and police officers in rural districts of Regions Nos. 3, 4. 5 and 6 on Friday 6th March.
The former president expressed the view that the ‘Holladar effect’ precipitated a series of legal actions – in the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) – from March to July 2020. The CCJ, eventually, on 8th July, overthrew a ruling by Guyana’s Court of Appeal that only ‘valid votes’ must be used to declare results.
He said that the entire crisis centered on the authoritative determination of the ‘validity’ of the votes by elections officials. The fact is that the Representation of the People Act requires the Chief Election Officer – who is solely empowered by the Laws of Guyana – to calculate the valid votes cast in an election.
Granger pointed out, further, that the Elections Commission was presented with a record of abuses, anomalies, discrepancies and irregularities which included ballots being cast in the names of persons who were dead or had migrated; ballots of persons without proper identification; ballots cast exceeding the number of persons on the Official List of Electors and ballots for one electoral district cast in another among other anomalies.
The scale, scope and substance of irregularities were revealed through tabulation and observation and should not have been ignored. The Chief Election Officer, in light of the exposure of these irregularities, submitted four reports to the Elections Commission. The first, on 15th June was rejected; the second, on 23rd June was rejected; the third, on 11th July was rejected; and, finally, the fourth Report, on 2nd August was accepted by the Commission.
The former president expressed the view that the ‘Holladar effect’ created a precedent for the Courts to presume a role to determine the validity of the elections before a declaration of results; to prevent the presentation of an official declaration of results and to provide an opportunity for the votes of the electorate to be invalidated by the edict of the judges.
