[2019] CCJ 13 (AJ)
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
[1]
This case involving the Guyana Elections Commission (or GECOM) was brought to
determine the lawfulness of the appointment of its Chairman. The case was heard on 8
May 2019 immediately before the hearing of a consolidated set of cases that dealt with
the validity of a motion of no confidence passed in the Government on 21 December
2018 (“the no confidence motion cases”). On 18 June 2019 this Court rendered its
judgments.1 In each case the Court arrived at a number of conclusions without making
specific declarations or orders. In this, “the GECOM Chairman case”, the Court
concluded that the process that resulted in the unilateral appointment by the President
of a Chairman of GECOM was flawed and in breach of the Constitution.
[2]
As occurred in the no confidence motion cases, counsel involved in the GECOM
Chairman case requested that the Court should not make any consequential orders on
the above conclusion without first hearing submissions from the parties on the nature
of the consequential orders that should be made by the Court. The Court acceded to this
request and accordingly ordered the parties to make written submissions to the Court
no later than 1 July 2019. Since the two sets of cases are in some respects related, the
Court received submissions covering both.
[3]
The need to issue consequential orders and directions in this case has been rendered
largely unnecessary because we understand that the GECOM Chairman has voluntarily
resigned his office since the delivery of our judgment on 18 June 2019. It is now a
matter of the greatest public importance that the President and the Leader of the
Opposition should, as soon as possible, embark upon and conclude the process of
appointing a new GECOM Chairman. This imperative is now of the utmost urgency in
light of our decision in the no confidence motion cases that the motion was validly
passed thereby triggering the need for fresh general elections. The Court refers to the
views we expressed at paragraphs 26 – 29 of our earlier judgment in this matter as a
suitable frame of reference for the process leading to such an appointment.2
1
See Christopher Ram et.al. v The AG of Guyana et.al. [2019] CCJ 10 (AJ); and Zulfikar Mustapha v The AG of
Guyana and the Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission [2019] CCJ 9 (AJ).
2
See Zulfikar Mustapha v The AG of Guyana and the Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission [2019]
CCJ 9 (AJ).