Elections timeframe needs a realistic review by parties
Stabroek News
A cursory reading of the proposed schedule for elections in 2001 drawn up by Chief Election Officer, Stanley Singh starkly reflects the enormity of the task that faces the country in the coming year. Singh's schema envisages the establishment of the new Elections Commission by the end of this month, its secretariat by February 15 and a determination of the required legislative changes two weeks later. By March 5, the members of the new Commission and its secretariat would have been familiarised with the elections process, tasks and goals. A work programme by March 13, completion of advertisements for field staff by March 19, agreement of polling procedures and the requisite legislative changes to be completed by June 2000 are other significant events on this timetable. A three-month period is set aside for recruitment, training and selection of polling officers to be finished no later than December 31. For good measure, another week is set aside for specialised training and polling day rehearsals. Everything would then theoretically be completed by January 11, 2001 for elections to be held within the Herdmanston Accord's stipulated window. The recent electoral history of this country, particularly in light of the current court challenge to the 1997 polls, leads one to believe that this indicative schedule is one that can hardly be met especially if the intention is to get it right. There will undoubtedly be slippages driven by the highly charged political atmosphere during this period, bureaucratic incompetence and Guyanese slowness. This issue of the elections must be approached with honesty, courage and the zeal to do what is right for Guyana. Having a botched, rushed election will be the worst possible alternative and none of the parties represented in Parliament can relish the chance of facing the electorate on this basis. Just as bad would be to stick to a compressed timetable and provide for grudging extensions during the year for specific activities. The air of uncertainty will lead to defective work by elections personnel which would not be remedied by slight adjustments in the schedule. An urgent meeting should therefore be convened by the four parliamentary parties either at the level of the Inter-Party Committee on Electoral Reform or higher to thrash out the issue of the January, 17, 2001 date embedded in the Herdmanston Accord before the elections process even begins. There should be a realistic assessment of the one-year schedule taking into account the strenuous demands of a public information campaign, registration of those who have attained the age of majority between 1997 and the 2000 cut-off point, the issue of the use of voter ID cards, claims and objections to the various voters rolls and the incredibly crucial task of the identification, hiring and training of competent polling officers. It is quite unlikely that these can be adequately catered for in this tight schedule that has been compiled by Singh. Have the parties even begun to discuss among themselves what model the new commission will take and who the candidate for the thankless post of chairman might be? What about the financial and material needs of the new commission? Have these been worked out and catered for? We urge the PPP/Civic, the PNC, TUF and AFG to meet urgently and arrive at a consensual agreement on whether the timeframe as set out by the Chief Election Officer is feasible (assuming there will be no referendum for the purposes of constitutional reform) and to accept that flexibility in the January 17, 2001 date may be essential to guarantee as far as possible a flawless election. The parties can also use this forum for agreeing on common requirements for the elections, the use of observers, the declaration of results at each polling place in addition to the count, an electoral campaign accord etc. Once the parameters for this poll are worked out, the parties should then sit down with civil society and carve out a role for it not only in crisis resolution and emergency aid but also in continuous assistance throughout the period and in conveying to the public that the process is not solely in the hands of the politicians but all of society. The 2001 poll must not find the country casting glances backwards into the old millennium but looking confidently towards the future.
|