In a sharply worded op-ed, GHK Lall calls for urgent, sustained action on biometric voter identification and comprehensive house-to-house registration ahead of Guyana’s 2030 elections, arguing that these reforms are essential to restore public trust in the electoral process.
Lall echoes the sentiments of Alliance for Change (AFC) interim leader David Patterson, stressing that biometric systems “must be very much a part of the next elections” and should have been a dominant, non-negotiable issue during the 2025 elections. Instead, Lall laments, it was not pursued with the necessary intensity, leaving the electorate vulnerable to doubts over the credibility of the voting process.
“The 2025 contest is over. The 2030 challenge starts from now; it really did from September 2nd,” Lall writes, underscoring the urgency of transforming biometrics from a sporadic talking point into a permanent national priority, comparable to the cost of living and clean governance.
Acknowledging positive feedback from inside Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) on biometrics’ potential to enhance election credibility, Lall challenges political actors to move beyond excuses about time constraints.
“Since there is agreement that biometrics has some good in it, then why not get going with it now?” he asks pointedly. He also emphasises the importance of nationwide house-to-house registration to replace what has long been derided as the “bloated list” of registered voters, a source of deep mistrust.
The Official List of Electors (OLE) has repeatedly been flagged as excessively large when compared with estimates of its resident voting population. As of March 2024, GECOM recorded about 706,439 registered voters, yet Commissioner Vincent Alexander estimated the resident voting-age population to be around 580,000, based on a school-age population of 200,000. This suggests an overcount of at least 126,000 names.
In the 2025 elections the list swelled further—to 757,490 names—and analysis suggests this is about 48% larger than what Guyana’s population pyramid (from Bureau of Statistics / Ministry of Finance) would allow for voting-age residents.
The excess is attributed to non‑resident citizens remaining on the list, deceased persons not being removed, and delays or inability in house‑to‑house registration or updating
Lall notes a critical distinction in the international community’s assessment of the 2025 elections: while observers and embassies lauded the process as “smooth and peaceful,” none explicitly called it “credible.” This gap, he suggests, speaks volumes about the lingering doubts among Guyanese about the electoral system’s fairness.
Importantly, Lall highlights that the main political parties agree on the feasibility of biometrics, removing what he terms “roadblocks that were erected.” With five years until 2030, he argues, the timeline is ample for implementing these reforms effectively.
In a strategic critique, Lall points out that if the ruling PPP government moves decisively to implement biometric registration and house-to-house registration, it could neutralize the opposition’s longstanding electoral grievances. “Electoral issues would be largely off the table,” he writes, leaving the opposition to focus on other substantive policy concerns such as economic management and governance—areas that, while important, lack the immediate emotional charge of election integrity.
Lall’s op-ed is a wake-up call that stresses the non-negotiable nature of electoral reform in Guyana. Without immediate and serious steps toward biometric voter identification and fresh registration, he implies, the country risks perpetuating cycles of distrust and contestation that undermine democratic legitimacy.
As he concludes, “Biometrics must be in the consciousness of the Guyanese people… Not should be or maybe; but what must be.”
