Forward Guyana Movement, GECOM, State in legal battle over right to be on general election ballot

Last Updated on Wednesday, 27 August 2025, 22:16 by Writer

Forward Guyana Movement (FGM) on Tuesday sought to convince the High Court that the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) was implementing the Representation of the People Act illegally to the exclusion of political parties that did not field geographical candidates in a number of administrative regions.

However, GECOM lawyer Arudranauth Gossai and Attorney General Anil Nandlall argued that GECOM was not at fault.

Instead, they said it was FGM and Assembly of Liberty and Prosperity (ALP) that did not submit geographical constituency candidates for several regions. “If you chose not to field a candidate, how are you blaming GECOM for that?” he asked rhetorically.

Assuming that FGM campaigns intensely in those regions and wins votes, Mr Gossai pondered over where they would get the candidates from since for the General Election, parties must have candidates for the geographic constituency so that they can be qualified to be on the ballot.

Messrs Gossai and Nandlall told the High Court that they intend to seek an award of significant costs.

FGM candidate Krystal Fisher, through her lawyer Dr Vivian Williams, said her party should have still been listed on the ballot for the general elections. “The Constitution contemplates voting without geographical constituencies,” Dr Williams told the court. “The framers were not mad men,” he added.

While Article 160(2) of Guyana’s Constitution says that parliament may make provision for geographical constituencies, Dr Williams said such a provision would not truly override the national right to vote which must be consistent with international conventions.

Acting Chief Justice Navindra Singh agreed with the Attorney General that a Canadian case, cited by Dr Williams, was not applicable because of the different legislative framework and voting in Guyana is not a fundamental right. The judge said the right to vote is subject to other provisions of the Constitution and other laws.

The acting Chief Justice told Dr Williams that no one was preventing his client from voting. Dr Williams retorted, saying that in reality voting has been elevated to a fundamental right. Mr Nandlall stressed that Guyana’s Constitution must be read as a whole rather than in parts.

Reminding the FGM lawyer that he said that GECOM acted unconstitutionally, the Acting Chief Justice asked him whether he found that GECOM had violated the constitution or the Representation of the People Act. After insisting on specific answers rather than an extended argument, Dr Williams cited the sections of the law, in particular, one that deals with the content of the ballot.

The Attorney General, who traced the evolution of Guyana’s electoral system to the British colonial period, said the Representation of the People Act is not an abstract instrument but was done under the Constitution. He said if a party does not comply with the rules, it could not contest the election. Mr Nandlall said Dr Williams failed to show how the law violates the Constitution. “They chose not to contest. They have not afforded the people to vote for them under the system and you blame the system,” he said.

Dr Williams returns to the court on Wednesday morning to reply to the oral arguments by the GECOM lawyer and the Attorney General.