The Parliamentary Elections Office (PEO) of Grenada has been established to function in accordance with the 1973 Constitution Order and the 1993 Representation of the People Act (RPA) along with pertinent regulations and amendments, under the ‘sole and independent’ direction of a Supervisor of Elections (SoE).
The PEO declares its mission: “To continuously register all eligible persons to vote, produce voters’ identification cards, publish the list of Electors and to conduct Elections in accordance with Legislation”.
With the abandonment of the National Constitution from March 1979 to October 1983 by the regime of Maurice Bishop’s Marxist New Jewel Movement (NJM) party, the PEO was dormant and no elections were held during this period until the first one on 03 December 1984 after democratic rule was restored.
Ever since Grenada’s political independence on 07 February 1974 and outside of the over four years of the isolation of the PEO, no serious attempt was advanced to affect the establishment and the functioning of the PEO, except on 24 November 2016 a referendum on a Constitution of Grenada (Elections and Boundaries Commission) (Amendment) Bill was conducted under the regime of Keith Mitchell’s New National Party (NNP).
The Bill purports to pass for an Act to alter the Constitution of Grenada to establish an Elections and Boundaries Commission which would carry out the functions formerly performed by the Supervisor of Elections and the Constituency Boundaries Commission, and thus having both original entities dissolved; but the Bill did not receive a Yes Vote by the electorate.
This referendum for the Replacement Entity was a fiasco, with an ‘erroneous and fraudulent’ process which involved six other simultaneous referenda and which contributed to the rejection of all the Bills of Grenada’s historic venture.
Another election-related offer to the Grenadian people on 24 November was the Constitution of Grenada (Fixed Date for Elections) (Amendment) Bill; however, the Bill was a misnomer and not designed to provide any ‘substantial difference’ in the application and effect of the existing constitutional provision on the dissolution of Parliament (section 52).
This other Bill simply provides a ‘technical version’ of the constitutional provision, deviating from the entrenched protection to parliamentary amendments, tending to facilitate more political manipulation and advantage about the calling of general elections through the lawmaking powers of the ruling political party.
In fact, the Bill makes no reference or takes no action about section 53 of the Constitution which specifies that the elections “shall be held at such time within three months” after Parliament is dissolved. “Such time” is often about ‘arbitrary and opportunistic’ discretion. Further remarking on the first-mentioned Bill.
The population was not thoroughly informed of the ‘basis and necessity’ for the constitutional amendments towards an Elections and Boundaries Commission, and neither has the Explanatory Memorandum of the Bill convey any ‘operational economy and efficacy’ or of any ‘electoral meaning and justice’ to be derived from those amendments.
It is instructive to realise though that throughout the decades the integrity of the PEO has been called into question and there has been the need and recommendations to standardise Campaign Financing for the contesting parties, as well as the need to evaluate the effect of financial contributions to the parties on the national economy during an elections period.
Disconcerting too is virtually the non-existence of the Constituency Boundaries Commission and of pertinent regulations regarding the ‘distribution and balancing’ of the voters amongst the unchanged fifteen constituencies as even before Grenada gaining Independence.
Despite the failure of Dickon Mitchell’s National Democratic Congress (NDC) party to include constitutional reforms and electoral reforms as prominent transformational features in the 2022 manifesto, as lamented in the article “Is The 2022 Elections Manifesto Of NDC Complete?”, there seems now to be revelations or indicators of ‘motives and moves’ by the NDC government to undermine the fundamental operations and roles of the PEO/SoE, with the introduction of influential partnerships and extraneous involvements.
Grenadians should be aware of and be robust against the tremendous threats which new ‘approaches and types’ of evolution can pose to the nation’s sovereign democracy, constitutional adherence, electoral justice and political stability.
Unfortunately; the naivety of the young people, the failing vibrancy of civil society organisations and the ‘silence of the good citizens’ bring those threats to reality.
Of particular concern are the utterances on The Bubb Report of 14 July 2024 by Dr. Cleophas Justine Pierre of the Research and Business Development firm of Dunn, Pierre, Barnett & Company Canada Limited. ‘Statistician’ Pierre asserts that the Firm has one of the largest databases of black people worldwide including data on the Grenada voters, and that he has spoken to someone of the PEO and wants to present that data to them.
The Labour Market and Migration Consultant informs also that the Firm has been undertaking surveys in Grenada, particularly following-up a ‘successfully predicted’ one done in 2022.
Pierre declares : “…. all of these micro data we want to know about these voters …. since that we already have most of the data in the country; we already have most of the data on the electorate than any of the political parties …. we can start informing and putting pressure on organisations to collect and present better data …. so people can know about the electorate …. we have the same software as persons in the United States where you could know what is the number of persons who voted Republican or Democratic.
The same software is available; however it’s not used in Grenada …. this 2023/2024 is a new age, is a new age of data and we want to present our information to the Grenadian public so they can start making better decisions ….”. Interesting!
Much clarification is needed about the status and the level of cooperation of Pierre’s company with the PEO/SoE. How would any of such relationships impact the conduct and the results of elections, or the election climate in Grenada?
Would the PEO/SoE be dependent on, and/or be pressured by Pierre’s company for data in order to make decisions, including to present pertinent reports? Or rather; shouldn’t Pierre’s company be relying on the data from the PEO/SoE to complement and/or to verify its comprehensive surveys about the demographic, occupational and socio-economic classifications of the voters?
The ‘intrusion and influence’ by political pollsters and consultants as Cambridge Analytica in local elections worldwide is widely recorded. In fact; it was broadcasted on NOWGRENADA website that former NDC’s leader, Mrs. Franka Bernardine, accuses that Cambridge Analytica assisted NNP to win the 2018 elections over NDC. Is Pierre’s company a rebranding or replacement of Cambridge Analytica?
The previous article “How Proper Is Governor-General On Supervisor of Elections?” points out the ‘manner and circumstances and timing’ by which a new SoE was appointed, effective 01 June 2024, without any measure of ‘justice and justifications’ to the Grenadian people.
Further to this development, and as the first public act by the new SoE, there has been the ‘abrupt and harsh’ deferment or putting on hold of the scheduled consultations on the procurement of a new Computerised Voter Registration System.
The article also highlights how pivotal and necessary is voter registration reform to ensure or to enhance Electoral Justice, and that the issues of electoral boundaries, citizenry enumerations and legislative amendments are intrinsic in the process of upgrading the Computerised System.
Concerns and speculations about the disturbance to the open consultations on the Computerised System, as a strategic political instruction by NDC’s transformational agenda, are ‘inevitable and appropriate’; and it will be a ‘betrayal and treason’ to secure the System with private deals.
Should the Voter Computerised System be ‘compromised and exposed’ by integrating it with other Government’s departments and with outside institutions for collecting, sharing, disaggregating and analysing data, as well as for enhanced public service delivery; and/or to what extent must this electronic networking be?
Could such new thrust of the PEO/SoE be ultra vires sections 32 and 35 of the Constitution?
As advised in the article “Broad-based Approach Needed On Grenada New Voter Registration System”, the Grenadian people should be inquisitive about how far, or about the threshold, to be tolerated in terms of the ‘capacity and function and connecting network’ of the New System, especially in this era of the power of Artificial Intelligence and the versatility of internet hackers.
Now with the hints and desires of Justine Pierre, should the System accommodate software for access to pollsters?
The disgusting episode involving the PEO/SoE during the rule of Keith’s NNP, about the desire of Grenada’s Government to implement the World Bank funded E-Government for Regional Integration Project (EGRIP) amongst the countries of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), stands as sound ‘reference and guide’ for the issue at hand.
The Glasgow, J. judgment on the litigation Judy Benoit v Her Excellency The Governor-General Dame Cecile La Grenade is ‘key and instructive’.
Although the application for Judicial Review is based more “in breach of the principles of natural justice”, the ‘background and circumstances’ for the litigation can also generate other constitutional challenges pertinent to the operations of the PEO/SoE which the Dickon-led NDC government must be mindful of.
The Judgment outlines how then SoE, Ms. Judy Benoit, was ‘unceremoniously and illegally’ dismissed in 2013, due to her hesitancy to include EGRIP in the 2012 installation of the Voter Computerised System.
Benoit was concerned about the violations of the legislative provisions, but of ‘goodwill’ exploring alternative arrangements for the implementation of EGRIP.
Apart from real concerns about breaching the laws, any action of mingling the electoral process with other processes such as the EGRIP, would increase the vulnerability of the voter registration system as well as other ‘peripherals and attachments’ such as the voting machines.
No one should be remiss about the accusations by the NDC when in opposition; thus: “The machinations of the operatives of the NNP within the (‘electoral’) system helped the NNP to win the elections”, especially following the firing of Judy Benoit because “she refused to tow the political line”.
Indeed, the challenges about innovations such as EGRIP and of Dr. Justine Pierre are now for the Dickon NDC-rule.
Critical moreover for recalling, is the 10 May 2022 letter of Dickon Mitchell to former SoE, Mr. Elvis Morain, on “concerns with the management of the electoral process”.
Amongst the issues listed in the Letter were the “Lengthy delays between the registration process and availability of the Voter Registration Cards”, and “The continued delayed publication of the addenda to the Consolidated list and the Consolidated list itself”.
Is Prime Minister Dickon Mitchell aware as to whether there is compliance by the new SoE, Mr. Arthur Pierre, of section 14 of the RPA; particularly referring to “An official consolidated list of electors shall be published by the Supervisor of Elections every six months”?
Further considering the nearing end of July 2024, is there a public excuse by PEO/SoE for any delay?
J K Roberts