It is with continued sadness that I have to question the quality of Chairman ret’d Justice Claudette Singh’s decision-making and that of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) as a constitutional office with responsibility for ensuring free, fair and transparent electoral processes and guaranteeing expression of the peoples authentic will. These and many other pertinent concerns expressed in various quarters of our society raise questions as to her probity, lack thereof and its impact on GECOM with its grossly diluted independence.
After having distinguished years of service in the courts of Guyana and being a beacon for women empowerment it is unfortunate that Chairman Singh finds herself to be subject of such concern from a wide cross section of people who held her in high esteem.
GECOM had more than five years under Singh’s leadership to prepare this nation for free, fair and transparent elections with the use of biometrics to enhance voter confidence, participation and acceptance of results and transition of power. The general belief is the retired Justice has become a pawn of the PPP. She now seems wrapped up and caught up, knowingly or unknowingly, in executing their wicked agenda on the people, denying our country political and electoral justice.
The question is: Why can’t we in oil rich Guyana do what’s necessary to include biometrics as part of the electoral process for the 2025 election. Lest we forget, the current GECOM was established within a short time by President Desmond Hoyte and Opposition (Minority) Leader Dr. Cheddi Jagan to facilitate the election in 1992. The Ali /Jagdeo regime lacks the will for positive change, social, economic and political justice. It is a disappointment to see the non-performance in this generation; a generation more equipped with technology at this fingertip and better able to disseminate information for mass response to the younger generation and not so young.
The concerns expressed herein by the general public are made in a context of Guyanese witnessing the 2020 Elections siege by organised interests. This includes: the illegal invasion and seizure of GECOM; the violent protests in Bath and Bushlot on the West Coast Berbice that saw police injured and bleeding, school children being viciously attacked, screaming whilst the their bus was being, public servants attacked, blockade of sections of the East Coast Demerara corridor affecting healthcare workers and others; the discrepancies unearthed during the Recount Exercise; the decision of the court on valid vote; the 47 ballot boxes with no support documents; the questionable imposition of the CCJ on the elections and the precedents set that only serve to weaken our electoral system.
The belief is these are all indicative of the much touted “oil curse.” The corruption evidenced in oil rich countries where the lust for oil wealth knows no limit has become a part of our Guyanese-ness – our identification. In our own instance Guyana took a bad hit from local, regional and international powers of influence. We must also not forget the false and misguided amalgamation of claims by a number of small parties being fed information from the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) instead of GECOM to support PPP claims.
Knowing the various influences at work, the nature of Bharrat Jagdeo and Irfaan Ali’s beasts, questions about Claudette Singh’s ability to operate independently and exercise the authority vested in her office must be answered. It is important that the electorate have confidence in her performance and that of GECOM. This is perhaps her last opportunity to set her legacy to withstand rigorous intellectual, and judicial review.
Within the last five years Justice Singh has consistently voted with the PPP on every major decision that can impact the coming elections. Her reason for seeking to defer the implementation of biometrics in the upcoming is also informed in context of the PPP’s shifting position. Up until recently the PPP was an advocate for the implementation of biometrics, as the political opposition, Guyana Trades Union Congress (GTUC), civic organisations and other members of society.
GECOM, under Claudette Singh’s leadership, is signaling the intention of continuing the process of counting and accepting votes that are not certified by the presiding officers and finding ways to issue orders (Order 60/2020) to make them legal. This cannot and will not be acceptable! Biometrics must save Guyana from this potential risk and a repeat of 2020.
The Opposition and civil society must be good stewards of our politics, ensuring this tumultuous era of history is not forgotten or repeated. We must not accept Bharrat Jagdeo and Justice Singh’s statements that the coming election can be free, fair and transparent without the implementation of biometrics. To do otherwise is to play blindly with the PPP and to return the PPP to office through a flawed system.
Evidence within several election cycles under the PPP reflected fraudulent votes and shenanigans in GECOM resulting in attempts and willful mis-allocation of seats to benefit the PPP.
When the PPP lost the elections in 2015, they picketed former GECOM Chairman Dr. Steve Surujbally not only demanding that he go but also demanding biometrics. How can we forget and not apply our collective energies to hold the PPP accountable for their blatant efforts to further subvert the will of the people. The PPP is obviously afraid of free, fair and transparent elections.
In November 2024 the Joint Opposition- A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR), Alliance for Change (AFC) and Working People’s Alliance (WPA)- issued a statement calling for biometrics. They must not only issue statements, they must stand up and lead the fight for it, create the hunger for it in our young generation, regardless of race, class or political affiliation. Those who want free, fair and transparent elections are standing with them to realise this sacred process.
In 1926 the trade union movement under the leadership of Hubert Nathaniel Critchlow, a man with only primary school education, started the fight for one-man-one vote. One could not have envisaged 99 years later a person of Justice Singh’s calibre would be making decisions that allow for a reduction of such political and electoral justice.
Today I call on all trade unionists to fiercely guard and proudly retain an abiding interest in the struggle for the free will of the people expressed through, one-man-one-vote which Critchlow led struggles for. His struggle was for every Guyanese to have that right. We must struggle for its efficient administration. This is part of the trade union legacy to this nation. Let us raise our voices and take a stand for Biometrics in 2025!
