Nandlall to Opposition: Prove claims of ineligible names on voters’ list

Attorney General (AG) Anil Nandlall has reiterated calls for the Parliamentary Opposition to provide evidence supporting its claim that “tens of thousands” of ineligible names appear on the Guyana Elections Commission’s (GECOM) voters’ list.

Addressing a press statement issued Tuesday by A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC), the AG restated that the party has failed to prove “even one name” to support its argument.

Nandlall suggested that the Opposition lacks tangible evidence of a faulty voters’ list, as it failed to provide proof during GECOM’s Claims and Objections period. He emphasised that it is the Opposition’s responsibility to substantiate its claims by presenting evidence that the list is bloated. According to the law, documentary evidence is just one method by which such claims can be verified.

The AG explained that a person raising an objection to a name on the voters’ list is not required to present a death certificate or travel document to justify its removal. Instead, the process simply requires lodging an objection, after which a date is set for a hearing to review the complaint. At this hearing, the necessary evidence must be presented.

Nandlall further outlined that, according to Section 22 of the National Registration Act, when the preliminary voters’ list is published, individuals can lodge complaints against names they believe should be removed. These objections are submitted to the GECOM registrar of the respective division.

All objections for that division are then compiled and posted in public buildings within the registration area for scrutiny. After this period, the GECOM registrar schedules a public hearing, during which the objections are reviewed. Those raising objections are expected to present their evidence and/or witnesses.

“They have not put forward one claim,” the AG asserted. “And I continue to say that their claim of tens of thousands bloat on the list is a fanciful one—one without merit and one that they cannot prove in any forum,” Nandlall maintained.