Police warn of online extortion scheme targeting bu...
The Guyana Police Force on Thursday warned the public, particularly members of the business community, to exercise caution amid reports of...
The Guyana Police Force on Thursday warned the public, particularly members of the business community, to exercise caution amid reports of...
Inadequate political intervention and insufficient financing remain major obstacles to combating hunger and improving food security in the Caribbean and Latin America,...
Academic success must translate into real empowerment and leadership opportunities for women and girls, Human Services and Social Security Minister Dr. Vindhya...
The Carter Center has raised concerns about Guyana’s electoral environment ahead of the country’s September 1 general and regional elections, warning that misuse of state resources, biased media coverage and lack of campaign finance transparency threaten electoral integrity.
In a preliminary report released this week, the Center said improvements have been made since the disputed 2020 elections, including reforms to voter registration and result tabulation. But it noted that many recommendations remain unimplemented and urged the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) to publish clear tabulation procedures to boost confidence.
A limited observation mission has been in Guyana since June 30, following an invitation from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The team, comprising experts from the United States, Georgia and the United Kingdom, has met with GECOM, the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC), political parties, civil society, diplomats and business leaders.
The Carter Center welcomed reforms enacted in 2022, such as decentralized tabulation in three populous regions, electronic posting of results and new mechanisms for continuous voter registration. The Official List of Electors, published July 30, contains 757,690 names.
The mission reported that campaigning has so far been largely peaceful, though it noted partisan flags being removed, delays in approvals for campaign events and restrictions on new parties, including denial of access to public spaces and interior air services.
Of six contesting parties, only four have signed the ERC’s code of conduct. The Center urged all parties—particularly A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) and the Forward Guyana Movement (FGM), which have not signed—to commit to the code’s principles.
The report also cited allegations of intimidation of public workers, business owners and journalists, who fear reprisals for supporting opposition parties. It urged both state agencies and political actors to respect freedom of association and expression.
Concerns were also raised over U.S. sanctions against We Invest in Nationhood (WIN) presidential candidate Azruddin Mohamed, which have prompted local banks to close the accounts of WIN members. The Center cautioned against “overcompliance” with sanctions, warning that such actions undermine democratic rights.
The absence of effective campaign finance regulation was described as a “serious weakness.” While laws require parties to submit expenditure reports after elections, enforcement is lacking and no framework exists for donation transparency or pre-election disclosures.
The Carter Center said it had received widespread allegations that the ruling party used state vehicles, workers and resources for campaigning. Announcements of government benefits, including salary adjustments for police officers and free bridge crossings, were cited as giving the incumbent an unfair advantage.
It also noted state media coverage was disproportionately favorable to the ruling party, with opposition groups reporting difficulty accessing airtime or advertising space.
Timely access to public information, impartial media coverage, and equal treatment of candidates are fundamental to free and fair elections, the Center said, urging GECOM to strengthen public outreach and ensure transparent communication.
The Carter Center mission will remain in Guyana through election day and issue a preliminary report shortly after voting, with a final assessment to follow in the months after the polls.