Carter Center recommends independent candidates be allowed to run for presidency

Last Updated on Thursday, 14 May 2026, 22:41 by Denis Chabrol

The Carter Center, which observed Guyana’s general and regional elections last September, is recommending that the country’s Constitution be reformed to allow independent candidates to contest for the presidency.

In its election observation mission report, the United States (US)-headquartered international non-governmental organisation that played a major role in brokering electoral reforms that led to Guyana’s first free and fair elections in 28 years, disagreed with the constitutional rules that prohibit independent candidates from standing for office to become either parliamentarians or president, though they are eligible to contest local
government elections.

“Candidates for higher office must belong to a political party list to participate in elections. This is an unreasonable limitation on the freedom of association and on the right to stand for election, and
consideration should be given to allowing candidates to run independently. The law and electoral system should
be reformed to allow independent candidates to contest the presidency,” says the Center

Calling the requirement for candidates for higher office to a political party list to participate in elections “an unreasonable limitation” on the freedom of association and on the right to stand for election, the Center recommends that the Constitutional Reform Commission explore the electoral system and consider options that would clarify and streamline the electoral system and the basis of representation.

The Carter Center recalls that the electoral system was the subject of two legal disputes prior to the 2025 elections. The first contested the absence of a legal basis in the Representation of the People Act for independent candidates and small parties to effectively contest in geographical constituencies, alleging a violation of the rights to stand and to vote under the constitution and Article 25 of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. According to the Carter Center, the applicant further argued that historical records show that reforms were meant to expand participation, not restrict it, and that the current framework unlawfully excludes independents. The Center also cites the second case that challenged the mandatory minimum
requirement in section 11B of the Representation of the People Act (six constituencies, 13 candidates), arguing it is unconstitutional, creates an unreasonable barrier for smaller/regional parties, infringes political participation and equal representation, breaches democratic rights, and exceeds parliament’s authority.

The Carter Center was instrumental in getting then President Desmond Hoyte to concede to demands by the then opposition for electoral reforms such as counting of the votes at the place of poll, posting of statements of poll on polling stations and a new voters list.