The organisations listed below are expressing serious concern regarding the integrity and inclusiveness of the September 2025 National Elections. While polling day was largely peaceful, multiple issues threaten the credibility of the process and the constitutional right of citizens to participate in free and fair elections.
Key Concerns Identified:
- Foreign Voter Participation
○ Credible reports and video evidence show groups of alleged Bangladeshi and Indian contract workers arriving in organized formations by bus at polling stations, most visibly in Region 4. The buses were met by senior police officers, suggesting prior organization.
○ These individuals presented Guyanese National ID cards. However, under the “Nationality” field, the word “Commonwealth” was recorded instead of “Guyanese,” which is legally invalid. Such registration should have been rejected under the Constitution and electoral law.
○ Our organisations demand clarification on:
■ The number, origin and status of all foreign voters on the electoral register.
■ Whether any coercion or contractual obligation influenced their participation.
■ Similar information for other non-Guyanese voters, such as Venezuelan nationals registered to vote.
- Voting Irregularities
○ Arrival of voters en bloc, rather than individually, is inconsistent with the principle of secret, individual suffrage enshrined in the Constitution.
○ Inclusion of ineligible foreign nationals undermines the credibility of the vote.
- Legal and Constitutional Implications
○ Article 59 of the Constitution of Guyana reserves the right to vote for citizens only. Any dilution of this right through ineligible voter participation compromises the legality and legitimacy of the electoral outcome.
○ Given the stakes, including governance over substantial oil revenues, it is imperative that all procedural, legal, and constitutional safeguards are rigorously enforced.
Observer Responsibility:
International observers have emphasized that elections must be credible, inclusive, and transparent. If this standard is applied, the GHRA would be shocked if any observer mission were to declare this election credible, inclusive, and transparent without first obtaining clarification on these critical issues, particularly foreign voter participation and accessibility failures.
Call to Action:
- To GECOM: Provide a full and transparent account of voter eligibility verification and remedial action for accessibility failures.
- To International and Domestic Observers: Withhold certification of the election results until foreign voter irregularities and accessibility breaches are fully investigated and remedied.
- To Government and Judiciary: Uphold the constitutional right of citizens to vote by initiating thorough inquiries and ensuring corrective measures where required.
We emphasise that successful elections are not measured solely by the absence of violence but by the credibility, legality, and inclusiveness of the electoral process. Without urgent action on these issues, the legitimacy of the 2025 elections—and by extension, governance over Guyana’s oil wealth—remains in serious doubt.
2nd September 2025
This statement is endorsed by:
- Guyana Trade Union Congress (GTUC)
- Red Thread
- Guyana Organization of Indigenous Peoples (GOIP)
- Policy Forum Guyana
- Access to Information Group
- Amerindian Peoples Association (APA)
- Guyana Workers Union (GWU)
- East Coast Clean-up Committee
- Transparency Institute Guyana Inc. (TIGI)
- Guyana Society for the Blind
- SASOD Guyana
- ——————————–
September 3, 2025 Statement
GECOM ignores Constitutional Requirement that Electors Be ‘Domiciled’ i.e. Permanent Residents
The basis of the call by Guyanese civil society organisations for an investigation into foreigners participating in Guyana’s elections has been rejected by GECOM and characterized as ‘unsubstantiated allegations’ aimed at undermining the integrity and credibility of the yet to be concluded elections.
The arguments supporting the call, both legal and circumstantial are as follows:
Article 59 of the Guyana Constitution states:
“ Subject to the provisions of article 159, every person may vote at an election if he or she is of the age eighteen years or upwards and is either a citizen of Guyana or a Commonwealth citizen domiciled and resident in Guyana. (emphasis added).”
Article 159 states
159 (b) …. a Commonwealth citizen who is not a citizen of Guyana and who is domiciled and resident in Guyana and has been so resident for a period of one year immediately preceding the qualifying date; …
The Oxford Dictionary primary definition of ‘domiciled’ is ‘place of permanent residence, dwelling-place, home’….
All those, including it appears GECOM, who rely solely on ‘resident in Guyana for a period of one year’ overlook the crucial word ‘domicile’. While the legal meaning is clear, it also accords with the commonsense reaction to the absurd idea that merely living for a year in Guyana is a reasonable basis for voting eligibility.
Moreover, GECOM complained that this issue was not raised during the period of ‘Claims & Objections’. This complaint overlooks publication of a letter Stabroek News on August 20th this year providing the legal background on precisely this issue.
Turning to the circumstantial issues.
o Is the practice of enrolling temporary contract labour on Voters Lists restricted to workers on construction projects? Are any Commonwealth citizens working on the oil rigs, for example, or in the medical field engaged in this practice?
o How many foreigners have been rendered eligible to vote in this manner? Such votes dilute the value of genuinely Guyanese votes.
o Which Agency was responsible for devising an ID card, identical with the Guyanese ID card except for the word ‘Commonwealth’ inserted where the word ‘Guyanese’ ought to be?
- A large numbers of unskilled labourers are alleged to have taken in part in the recent elections in a manner that suggests external assistance or organization. While external help in itself is not uncommon, particularly with the elderly or otherwise physically impaired, the instances associated with foreign voters went well beyond simply getting people to the polls. Attention has been particularly drawn to the contract labour brought from other countries, notably India and Bangladesh which begs the following questions:
o Was their participation in elections in any way associated with their terms of employment?
o Why were the Guyana Police Force involved in meeting bus-loads of Bangladesh labourers at Polling stations.
o Such workers are normally unskilled and poorly paid and have little trade union protection. Their command of English – as verified by casual contact on the road-building programme – is frequently limited. Why would this category of persons suddenly demonstrate – en masse, not an isolated individual – the sophistication needed to properly register to vote?
o Labour transported from the Indian sub-continent raises troubling similarity to the notorious colonial abuse of indentured labour.
o How widespread is the practice of ignoring the ‘domiciled’ requirement?
o What is the impact on the results of elections?
o GECOM is responsible for all administrative aspects of elections and should declare all non-domiciled voters invalid.
o GECOM Public Relations should ensure everyone understands the meaning of ‘domicile.
September 3rd 2025
Statement is endorsed by:
- Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA)
- Guyana Trade Union Congress (GTUC)
- Red Thread
- Guyana Organization of Indigenous Peoples (GOIP)
- Policy Forum Guyana
- Access to Information Group
- Amerindian Peoples Association (APA)
- General Workers Union (GWU)
- East Coast Clean-up Committee
- Transparency Institute Guyana Inc. (TIGI)
- Guyana Society for the Blind
- SASOD Guyana
