Former Minister in A Partnership for National Unity and Alliance for Change (APNU+AFC), Jaipaul Sharma, is once again turning his analytical eye to the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), in what some are calling “surgical” scrutiny of official results from the recently concluded 2025 General and Regional Elections.
In a series of detailed exposés published on his social media pages, Sharma outlines what he says are glaring anomalies in GECOM’s Statements of Poll (SoPs), raising serious concerns about the integrity of the electoral process.
According to Sharma, the data retrieved directly from GECOM’s own website exposes a pattern of irregularities that not only breach the Representation of the People Act, but also suggest a flagrant disregard by GECOM — from the Commission level to staffers — to uphold the law.
The alleged manipulation many shared was designed to tilt results in favour of the ruling People’s Progressive Party (PPP), potentially undermining the legitimacy of both the Irfaan Ali administration and Guyana’s democracy.
“The evidence the former finance minister is unearthing not only violates the Representation of the People but exemplifies a flagrant disregard by GECOM from the Commission level to the staffer to uphold the law,” one commentator said. “They appear more bent on delivering results that tilted toward the governing People’s Progressive Party.”
Sharma’s most pointed criticism stems from what he calls statistical and procedural absurdities in District 6 — a region with 111,554 registered voters, spread across 435 polling stations. According to him, over-voting at private residences, unexplained formulas scribbled on official forms, and unusually high turnout rates at select locations demand immediate investigation.
In one cited example, Polling Division #661112 (Ballot Box EC 60432), located at Kowshal Pulmattie’s Residence, listed 3 assigned electors but 4 votes cast — a 133% voter turnout, compared to the national average of 58%.
Similarly, Polling Division #661122 (Ballot Box EC 60433), situated at Lall Jagdish Lall’s Farm House, had 1 assigned elector, but 2 votes recorded, making for a 200% turnout.
“Now there can be a valid explanation as to why one more person voted in both polling stations but obviously I don’t know why, so maybe GECOM can provide the answer,” Sharma wrote.
“I told you folks it was CONFUSION.”
In another analysis, Sharma scrutinised Polling Division #66211D(i), located at Ralph Hendricks’ Residence (Ballot Box EC 60430), where 43 electors were assigned, but 31 votes cast, a turnout of 72.09% — again, significantly higher than the national average.
However, it was the unclear mathematical notations scribbled on the Statement of Polls (SoPs) that drew Sharma’s strongest ire.
“I did Pure Mathematics, which involves exploring the inherent structure and logic of mathematics, but I couldn’t figure out what kind of maths was being used on this SoP,” he said.
“It looks like Oddmaths or Trickgonometry.”
What’s more, Sharma highlighted that the SoPs in question were signed off by GECOM officials and agents, including members from the PPP and WIN party, indicating the anomalies passed multiple layers of supposed verification.
Growing Calls for Transparency
While Sharma stops short of making direct legal accusations, he suggests that the irregularities are significant enough to warrant legal action, as he previously indicated. In Guyana’s proportional representation system, “every vote is critical” — one vote can influence not only the presidency, but also the composition of Parliament and regional councils.
These allegations come amid an already charged political atmosphere, with persistent distrust in the electoral process and mounting public concern over GECOM’s transparency and credibility.
To date, GECOM has not issued a response to Sharma’s findings or addressed the specific anomalies he has raised. No explanation has been offered for the alleged over-voting or inconsistencies in turnout calculations.
With international observer missions having already endorsed the elections, Sharma’s revelations pose a challenge not only to GECOM but also to the credibility of those external assessments.
As Sharma’s forensic breakdown of the electoral data continues, many are now demanding that GECOM publicly address the concerns, clarify voting irregularities, and explain the decision-making processes behind validating results that — if Sharma’s findings hold — could shake public confidence in the foundation of Guyana’s democratic system.
Many are saying these glaring irregularities not only tarnish the integrity of the outcome, but if the ballot boxes were to be opened and checked, the situation may be much worse.
For now, the silence from GECOM is loud — and growing louder.
