Veteran trade unionist and columnist Lincoln Lewis has issued a sobering call to action, warning that Guyana is on the brink of yet another election marred by mistrust, ethnic tension, and disenfranchisement—unless bold political leadership steps up to address what he describes as a fundamentally flawed voters list.
In his Eye on Guyana column published Sunday, Lewis drew on Albert Einstein’s famed definition of insanity—doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different result—to caution the political Opposition against heading into the 2025 General and Regional Elections with a voters list that has long been condemned as bloated and untrustworthy.
“This reference,” Lewis wrote, “is specifically directed at the Opposition, which seems intent on proceeding to an election with a bloated voters list—condemned by all and sundry, including regional and international observers at the 2020 General and Regional Elections.”
For Lewis, this is not just a political issue; it is a national and labour crisis. With billions in oil and gas revenues at stake, he says the election will ultimately determine who controls the “national pie” and whether the wealth of the country will be equitably shared with the working class.
“Labour is concerned about the equitable distribution of these resources to the benefit of the working class of Guyana,” he wrote.
What alarms Lewis further is the silence of the governing People’s Progressive Party (PPP) on the very reforms it once championed. “The PPP, which in 2015 was among those who championed a clean voters list and biometrics… has now gone silent,” he said, calling for a renewed push by the Opposition and civil society to demand action.
Independent international observers have long echoed the concerns now being raised at home. The Organisation of American States (OAS), in its post-election report, called for comprehensive reform of Guyana’s voter registration system, stressing the need for clear legal mechanisms to update the list, address inaccuracies, and allow for transparent resolution of complaints related to voter inclusion or exclusion.
On campaign finance—another area often cited as problematic in Guyana—the OAS urged the modernisation of campaign finance laws, including setting spending limits, disclosing sources of funding, prohibiting anonymous donations, and capping private or in-kind contributions.
Similarly, CARICOM’s election observer mission described the situation more bluntly. It stated that Guyana was not adequately prepared for the 2020 elections, citing the state of the voter registry as a major deficiency. The report recommended a full re-registration of all voters as an essential starting point for electoral reform, asserting that the suspicion of a bloated list was “not without merit.”
These international assessments reinforce the urgency behind local calls that credible elections cannot take place without a trustworthy and transparent voter registration system.
Though civil society, including the Guyana Trades Union Congress (GTUC), has been active, Lewis insists meaningful change requires political will.
He did not spare the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), indicting it of reckless behavior in pressing forward with elections using a flawed list. He argued that both the Government and the Opposition are enabling this, whether by commission or omission. “It matters not who is more or less responsible,” he noted. “GECOM is being reckless.”
Lewis believes that the Opposition still has tools at its disposal, including the constitutional ability to bring legislation to Parliament. He chastised the Opposition for failing to introduce a Bill to amend Article 171(1) of the Constitution to allow the removal of names that do not belong on the voters list, despite being advised to do so “publicly and privately.”
According to Lewis, “They should let the nation witness the Government’s acceptance or rejection of their legitimate pursuit.”
Even within GECOM, Lewis said, Opposition-nominated commissioners have consistently pointed out “corrupt practices,” though their warnings often feel like “voices crying in the wilderness.”
He cited GECOM’s own agreed Work Plan, which he claims is being ignored at the behest of President Irfaan Ali and with the compliance of Chairperson Justice Claudette Singh—both of whom, he said, have “overstepped their authority.”
Beyond legality and procedure, Lewis warned of deeper consequences: the elections once again threatening to inflame Guyana’s long-standing ethnic divisions.
“Elections in Guyana are always a source of grave discontent,” he wrote, adding that while ordinary citizens bear the brunt of this unrest, politicians often emerge unscathed and return to “hobnobbing” once the dust settles.
“The workers of this country are caught in the tug of war between the two major forces,” he observed. “At the end of the day, the politicians will continue to hobnob, while the citizens… bear the brunt of the animosity.”
Speaking on behalf of the GTUC, Lewis emphasised the union’s unwavering concern for peace, security, and fairness for every worker—regardless of race, union affiliation, or political leaning. He reiterated the labour movement’s historic fight for “one man, one vote,” clarifying:
“I say one eligible man, one vote—not a missing man or woman… one valid vote, correctly stamped and identified.”
In a final appeal to both Government and Opposition, Lewis reminded leaders that Guyana’s history holds a successful template for electoral compromise: the 1990 cooperation between President Desmond Hoyte and Opposition Leader Cheddi Jagan.
“It is not too late,” he urged. “That playbook still exists—and it can serve as a guide to provide the citizens with the political environment we deserve: free, fair, and credible elections.”
As Guyana heads into one of its most economically consequential elections, Lewis’s message is clear: if the political class fails to act, it’s the people—and especially the workers—who will pay the price.
