Carter Center frowns on PPP’s use of state resources

Last Updated on Tuesday, 19 August 2025, 22:13 by Writer

The Carter Center’s limited election observation mission in Guyana says it has received several reports that the incumbent People’s Progressive Party Civic (PPPC) has misused state resources and the state media during the campaign for the September 1 general and regional elections.

“While Guyana’s laws do not prohibit new government spending after an election is called, such spending runs contrary to international standards and best practices intended to ensure a level playing field,” the organisation said in a pre-election statement.

The Carter Center which has been invited by the Guyana government to observe the polls said it has received multiple allegations from opposition political parties and civil society that the ruling party has misused state resources. The organisation notes that social media and news reports are also rife with photographs suggestive of this problem. “The use of state resources for party campaigning runs contrary to Guyana’s international obligations with respect to campaign finance,” the Atlanta-based organisation said.

The Center says it has received reports alleging that the ruling party has used state-owned vehicles to campaign and taken advantage of “10-day workers” — employed part-time by the government — in campaign activities.

Official government statements about the opening of schools and other public buildings regularly feature public officials in full ruling-party regalia, blurring the line between the state and the party.

Since July 30, the president has announced he would promote over 2,800 Guyana Police Force officers. On August 1, the government announced that bridge crossings would now be free. “These and similar measures can be seen to afford the ruling party an unfair advantage,” said the Carter Center which had played a major role in securing significant electoral reforms in 1990 in preparation for the 1992 general and regional elections.

Although The Carter Center is not conducting systematic media monitoring, the mission says it has noted and received reports indicating that state media coverage appears to be biased in favor of the ruling party. Several political parties reported limited access to state media, with their events receiving little or no coverage, and one party alleged it was denied the opportunity to place advertisements in state media.

“In the absence of specific legal provisions regulating media conduct during the electoral period, The Carter Center encourages state media to provide equal treatment to all political parties,” that organisation said.

In terms of campaign finance, the Center recommends that that political parties fulfill the requirement to submit post-election financial reports to the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) within 35 days of the declaration of results, and for their subsequent publication by the Chief Election Officer. “While legal amendments in this area remain necessary, GECOM should at a minimum remind political parties to comply with existing reporting requirements within the legally prescribed timeframe as a step toward fostering a culture of transparency and accountability,” the Center says.

The Carter Center says Guyana lacks an effective framework or mechanism to ensure transparency or accountability in campaign financing. This, the Center says, contributes to disparities between campaigns and potentially limits voters’ ability to make informed choices. The Center adds that there are no effective enforcement mechanisms for these regulations, and the law lacks provisions regulating donations and expenditures, or mechanisms to ensure transparency to the public in advance of election day.

These areas mentioned in The Carter Center’s pre-election statement had been raised by it and other international observer missions dating back to 1992. Little or no action has been taken by successive governments to implement the recommendations, except for amendments to the Representation of the People Act to avoid alleged attempts to declare fraudulent results in favour of the then ruling A Partnership for National Unity+Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC).