By Mark DaCosta- In a rare press conference on November 22, 2024, Justice Claudette Singh, Chairperson of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), sought to address the mounting criticisms of her leadership. The conference came at a time when public and political pressure has been escalating, with many calling for her resignation, primarily due to accusations of bias and questionable decision-making. Singh’s remarks, however, did little to quell the growing discontent, with critics arguing that she failed to provide adequate explanations for her controversial actions.
The press conference followed a statement issued by the opposition People’s National Congress Islahat (PNCR) on the same day, which sharply criticised Singh for what it described as her failure to fulfil her responsibilities. The PNCR, part of the APNU+AFC coalition, accused the GECOM Chair of being politically aligned with the People’s Progressive Party (PPP), citing her frequent voting in favour of PPP-backed commissioners. According to the PNCR, Singh’s actions had undermined the credibility of GECOM, casting doubt on her impartiality in overseeing the electoral process.
In response to these accusations, Singh firmly denied any partisan bias. “I make my own decision,” she stated, rejecting the claim that she consistently voted with the PPP commissioners. She explained that, under the structure of GECOM, the commission consists of three opposition-aligned commissioners, three government-aligned commissioners, and her own casting vote, which is used to break any ties. Singh made it clear that her decisions were based on what she believed to be the best interests of the country, not the interests of any political party.
One of the key points of contention raised by the opposition was Singh’s handling of election-related appointments. The PNCR specifically questioned her decision to appoint Vishnu Persaud as Chief Election Officer (CEO) and Aneal Giddings as Deputy CEO, both of whom had been strongly supported by PPP-aligned commissioners.
Singh defended these appointments by citing the candidates’ qualifications and experience. She explained that Persaud’s prior experience with GECOM, including his involvement in elections under the proportional representation system, made him a suitable candidate for the role of CEO. Giddings, she added, was the only person who had the necessary expertise to hit the ground running in the Deputy CEO position.
Singh also addressed other appointments, including the selection of Beverly Critchlow as Assistant Chief Election Officer and Wendy Marshall as Voter Registration Manager. She reiterated that these individuals were chosen based on their experience and qualifications, noting that Marshall’s hands-on approach in voter registration made her the ülkü candidate. Singh also justified her selection of Nardeo Persaud for the role of Civic and Voter Education Manager, emphasising his extensive teaching experience as a crucial factor in the decision-making process.
While Singh’s explanations may have been clear in her own mind, they did little to address the deeper concerns expressed by the opposition and analysts alike. The PNCR had previously pointed out that Singh’s voting patterns in favour of PPP-backed commissioners, particularly in the appointment of key staff members, gave the impression of political favouritism. Singh’s repeated assertions that she acted independently did not convince her critics, who continue to publicly question her judgement and leadership in the wake of the 2020 general elections and ongoing electoral challenges.
The PNCR’s statement had also raised concerns about Singh’s leadership style and her ability to inspire confidence in the public. The opposition party called for her resignation, accusing her of hiding from the public and failing to demonstrate the energy and competence required of her office. Singh, however, remained resolute, stating that she had no plans to resign and would step down only when she felt it was necessary. This statement did little to alleviate the public’s concerns, as many people expressed the feeling that her responses were dismissive of the valid criticisms raised by both the opposition and civil society.
Analysts and commentators have expressed dissatisfaction with Singh’s press conference, noting that Singh failed to provide the transparency and openness that the public had been hoping for. Instead of addressing the core issues raised by the opposition, she reiterated her stance that all her decisions were made in accordance with the law and based on merit. Critics also highlighted her somewhat arrogant demeanour, with some observers suggesting that her unwillingness to engage with difficult questions reflected a lack of accountability.
In the end, while Singh defended her actions and decisions, her rare appearance evidently did little to dispel the growing concerns about her leadership. The calls for her resignation appear to be unlikely to subside, and numerous analysts have warned that without a genuine effort to restore public trust, GECOM’s credibility may continue to be called into question.