Acting Chief Justice Roxane George has dismissed the voter house-to-house verification case, which was filed filed by People’s National Congress Reform Chief Scrutineer, Carol Smith-Joseph.

In her decision this morning, Acting Chief Justice George ruled that “addresses claimed” by registrants ought not to be verified by the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM).

“In my view, the address claimed has to be accepted. The Registration Officer cannot say to a person presenting themselves for registration that they do not accept the address they are given for whatever reason, and therefore disqualify the person for a first registration or registration of a change of address. To do so, would be to disenfranchise persons, which would be unconstitutional,” the Acting Chief Justice said.

It was explained by the Chief Justice that the provision for the address is merely to identify the polling station to which one would be assigned for the purpose of voting.

In laying down the grounds for her application to the Court through her attorney Dexter Todd, the PNC Chief Scrutineer had argued that notwithstanding the Amendments to the National Registration Act in 2022, there is cause for concern, explaining that some addresses provided have empty lots or dilapidated and abandoned buildings. She said in other cases, no one lives at the addresses provided. She believes the inclusion of such persons in the National Register of Registrants can lead to the contamination of the Official List of Electors.

But the Chief Justice said Smith-Joseph failed to provide a “thread of evidence” to back up her claim.

“The applicant has produced no evidence to support the contention that there are persons who have been found not to be located at the addresses stated on their registration information, that is, that they do not reside at the addresses claimed. The evidence produced is based on the applicant’s views on or perceptions of what is or might be occurring,” Chief Justice said.

The Acting Chief Justice said it was strange that the applicant is unaware that the amendment to the National Registration Act in 2022 repealed, and therefore, removed the requirement for House-to-House Registration.

Justice George said Smith-Joseph failed to provide answers to important questions emanating from her arguments, such as the factors or parameters to be considered in deciding that an address claimed is not acceptable, how the connection to an address is to be determined and who determines the factors to be so applied or the address claimed has a dilapidated or abandoned building or that a neighbour’s indication that a person does not live at an address is accurate. 

The Judge ruled that the Elections Commission does not have the discretion to refuse to register a person or transfer a name of a person from the National Register or List of Electors because the address claimed is not acceptable to the registration officer and or a party scrutineer.

Apart from the residency requirements for Commonwealth citizens, residency is not a requirement for Guyanese citizens to qualify for registration to be included in the National Register and the Official List of Electors for the purpopse of voting. Article 159 states that Guyanese 18 years and older are eligible to vote, and according to the Chief Justice, the Constitution includes  no distinction in the two components of the General Elections.

“Just to be clear, the geographical and top-up components both relate to National or General Elections. So, the submission that there has to be a residency requirement for the geographical constituency element of the General Election as advanced by the applicant is misplaced,” the Chief Justice ruled.

Turning her attention to the Regional Election, in which the Counsel for the Elections Commission, Kurt Da Silva argued that residency is still a Constitutional requirement for Guyanese to vote in Regional Elections under Article 73 (1), the Chief Justice said once persons are included in the Official List of Electors, they are therefore eligible to vote in Regional Elections.

“I have concluded that to satisfy the constitutional and statutory requirements, having determined that a person have been properly registered pursuant to Article 159 (1), which results in their name being on the Official List of Electors, it is to their address claimed that one would look to decide where they are residing for the purposes of preparing the List of Electors for the Regional Elections,” the Chief Justice ruled.

It was explained by the Chief Justice that as provided by the electoral laws, the list of persons entitled to vote in the Regional Elections shall be electors whose names appear on the Office List of Electors ins any division within the region.

She said addresses provided by eligible applicants to GECOM at the point of registration must be accepted for inclusion on the National Register of Registration, and ultimately placed on the Official List of Electors once the requirements outlined in Article 159 are met.

The Chief Justice warned that to do otherwise would be to disenfranchise that registrant from voting in the elections. She said the issues raised by the Counsel for the Elections Commission, Kurt DaSilva, were noted, but those issues ought to be addressed at the level of the National Assembly. She said the election laws in Guyana appear to be all over the place, and there is need for them to be addressed.

The GECOM Counsel had argued that while verification is not required for General elections, it should be required for Regional Elections, since voters ought to be registered in the regions where they cast their vote for their regional representative.

Attorney General, Senior Counsel Anil Nandlall has welcomed the ruling and noted the judgment was elaborate and reasoned. He said the ruling has once again confirmed that there is no legal requirement for a Guyanese to be resident at a particular address in Guyana in order to be registered or to vote.

He said the Court saw the case as an attempt to disenfranchise and violate the doctrine of separation of power.

The PNC’s Chief Scrutineer intends to appeal the case.

Related posts:

Attorney General clashes with GECOM Counsel in Verification case; Acting Chief Justice delays decision to April 3 GECOM CEO rejects and denounces submissions of GECOM Legal Counsel in House-to-House verification case High Court to rule in house-to-house verification case on March 28 Arguments to begin on March 17 in case seeking house-to-house verification of registrants