Opposition Leader criticises British High Commissioner because he disagrees with her position on voters list

Last Updated on Tuesday, 15 November 2022, 13:51 by Denis Chabrol

Opposition Leader Aubrey Norton on Tuesday discarded British High Commissioner Jane Miller’s view that the existing voters list could be used with current safeguards, but conceded that the opposition coalition of A Partnership for National Unity+Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) would only endorse positions that are in its interest.

He said the British High Commissioner Jane Miller “must not be allowed to go against the wishes of the Guyanese people” and that the coalition was keen on knowing whether the safeguards she referred to should include biometric verification of electors at polling stations. “While we pursue good relations with all countries, we are committed to ensuring our decisions are made by the people of Guyana and therefore we abhor the attempt by any diplomat to impose their will on the people of Guyana,” he told a news conference.

He accused the British envoy of making “ill-informed comments” on her own even after the opposition had briefed the American, British, Canadian and European diplomats were briefed together about the need for a clean voters list. “I have no doubt that we have provided them information as it relates to the voters list. I have no doubt that the British High Commission has a right to make a pronouncement. What I, however, acknowledge is that we also have a right to make pronouncement on any pronouncement that is made,” he said, adding that equally the government has a right to defend itself.

While noting that the position by the British envoy seemed “antithetical” to call by all of the observers at the 2020 elections for a clean voters list, he admitted that the observers conclusions that the elections represented the will of the Guyanese people was not in the coalition’s interest to highlight. ”

Asked what would have been the opposition’s position if the British High Commissioner had cited the need for biometrics and the cleansing of the voters list, he said “if the British High Commissioner had said that, we would have concluded that she got our message and we would have welcomed it. To the extent that she hasn’t said that, it does not suit, in our opinion, the interest of the people of Guyana and our constituency for her to make such a statement,” he said. Mr  Norton said that as a political party, “we have a right to protect what we perceive to be our interest.”

The European Union Observation Mission concluded that “overall, existing safeguards – notably the use of voter lists with ID pictures
by polling staff and party agents – were robust enough to prevent the risk of voter impersonation on election day.” The CARICOM Observation Team for the Recount of the votes cast in the March 2020 elections also said that, “despite our concerns, nothing that we witnessed warrants a challenge to the inescapable conclusion that the recount results are acceptable and should constitute the basis of the declaration of the results of the March 2, 2020 elections.”

The Opposition Leader latched only to the CARICOM Mission’s recommendation that “as a minimum condition for electoral reform, the team recommends the urgent need for the total re-registration of all voters in Guyana.” In that regard, he said it was CARICOM’s interest, as an inter-governmental agency, to represent the “various dimensions so that appears to be independent” by presenting elements that would suit both the government and the opposition.

The Carter Center, in its report, said its observation mission “found that election day was orderly and transparent and provided a sound basis for the credible expression.” That mission also added that the process ran into trouble during tabulation, and after a recount of all the votes cast, acceptable results were declared, as observed by CARICOM.

The Organisation of American States (OAS) Election Observation Mission has also recommended comprehensive reform of the voter registration system, along with the necessary legislative authorizations for registration, changes to voter lists and submission of complaints about the exclusion or inclusion of voters, and undertaking a House-to-House registration exercise at the earliest opportunity upon
completion of the election and periodically thereafter.

Mr Norton accused the People’s Progressive Party Civic (PPP) of collecting identification cards of persons, who are overseas, and giving them to others to vote. He said that practice was particularly prevalent in PPP strongholds where APNU+AFC polling agents have in the past been bullied.