Another lawsuit stalls Guyana elections announcement
GEORGETOWN – The Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) postponed its meeting scheduled for Tuesday after a private citizen filed legal action seeking to prevent it from using the recounted, valid and certified results to declare the results of the disputed March 2 regional and general elections.
The three Government nominated members on the seven-member GECOM, told reporters that the chairman, retired justice Claudette Singh had been served with the court action filed by the private citizen, Misenga Jones and that the matter will be heard in the High Court on Wednesday at 10 a.m. (local time).
Jones is seeking a number of reliefs including asking the High Court to compel GECOM to use the 10 district declarations in announcing the winner of the elections.
She has named GECOM, its Chairman retired justice Claudette Singh and the Attorney General, Basil Williams.
GECOM Commissioner, Vincent Alexander, told reporters the meeting that was scheduled for Tuesday to receive a new report from the Chief Elections Officer, Keith Lowenfield, after the GECOM chairman had rejected the one presented over the last weekend, did not materialise.
Lowenfield last weekend presented a report that put the valid votes counted in the elections as 475 118, giving the ruling coalition, A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) 236 777 and the main opposition People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) 229 330.
“We were informed that a matter is before the Court and we brought it to the attention of the chair that she has established a pattern, a practice when matters are filed we do not proceed with the business of the meeting at that particular time.
“So it is against that background we have not received any substantive issue coming to the meeting today,” he said, acknowledging that the “chairman had been served”.
Another Government Commissioner, Charles Corbin said that “the usual practice is when a matter has been filed, the practice of the chairman has always been that our business is held in abeyance until the determination of that matter.
“In fact even when the matter is determinate, she always insist that we await the written judgement and shortly before 1 p.m. (local time) we received from the chairman soft copy of the filing,” he added. (CMC)