GUYANA'S Bloated Electoral List Undermines Democracy: CARICOM, OAS, and the Commonwealth Must Act

 

GEORGETOWN, Guyana, March 9, 2025 -  Niccolò Machiavelli, perhaps the leading political philosopher, discusses in The Prince a tendency in which leaders often act in their own self-interest, using alliances and public perception to maintain power.

This clearly seems to be the case with Guyana and CARICOM leadership, which has remained silent amidst a serious threat to Guyana’s democracy due to its bloated voters’ list. Evidence from the 2020 elections has proven that such irregularities can severely undermine democracy.

In 2020, Guyana’s elections were highly disputable. CARICOM’s chairman at the time, Mia Mottley, played a central role, frequently releasing statements demanding that the results emerging from the recount be used to declare a winner.

Her successor as CARICOM chairman, Ralph Gonsalves, took an even more aggressive stance, even going as far as telling then-President David Granger to “take his licks like a man” and leave power.

One of the key recommendations made by the CARICOM-appointed recount team was that, as a minimum requirement, Guyana should ensure a total re-registration of all voters, describing it as a minimum condition for electoral reform. Naturally, as the arbiter of the disputed 2020 elections, one would have expected CARICOM to follow up on its own recommendations.

However, instead of ensuring implementation, CARICOM has remained silent. Many of the leaders and individuals in the region who were very vocal in 2020 in defense of democracy have since disappeared from the conversation.

In countries like Guyana, where politics is highly contentious, CARICOM should have learned from other regional bodies, such as the East African Community (EAC). For example, following Kenya’s disputed 2007 elections, in which more than 1,500 people were killed, local leaders such as former Tanzanian President Benjamin Mkapa.

The late Kofi Annan played a pivotal role in implementing constitutional reforms that led to long-term electoral integrity. In contrast, CARICOM’s failure to act on its own recommendations suggests a lack of commitment to democratic principles.

Following the 2007 controversial elections in Kenya, the country, with the help of regional leaders headed by Kofi Annan and Benjamin Mkapa, embarked on a meaningful healing and reform process. This initiative resulted in wide-ranging constitutional reforms, culminating in Kenya’s adoption of a new constitution in 2010, approved by 67% of Kenyans in a national referendum.

Kenya also faced disputes related to multiple voting, particularly in the Mt. Kenya region. To address these allegations and adhere to the electoral process guidelines set by the Supreme Court, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) undertook a complete re-registration of all electors in Kenya.

Additionally, the Kenya Integrated Election Management System (KIEMS) was implemented to enhance transparency and prevent electoral fraud. While IEBC officially reported a voter turnout of 65% in Kenya’s last elections, some observers argue that the biometric verification requirement under KIEMS may have contributed to this lower turnout by strictly ensuring that only registered voters physically present at their polling stations could vote.

Guyana, however, remains in stark contrast. Despite credible allegations of multiple voting, deceased individuals appearing on the electoral roll, and votes cast in the names of overseas citizens, no such corrective measures have been implemented. Instead, the bloated voters’ list remains untouched, creating fertile ground for electoral manipulation and a crisis of legitimacy.

This is even made worse by a ruling from the CCJ which said that any vote, prima facie marked valid remains valid and nothing can change its status apart from the decision of the electoral court. It was on this basis that several ballot boxes from the East Coast without supportive documents were considered valid by the court.

This ruling essentially opens floodgates of fraud—after all, any vote prima facie marked valid, regardless of whether it was cast in the name of a deceased person, is valid until invalidated by a court..

A Regional Failure: CARICOM’s Repeated Neglect

CARICOM’s failure to uphold democratic principles in Guyana reflects its broader failures in regional integration. In Guyana, it is likely that Western powers need to maintain a system that will facilitate the continued exploitation of that sister CARICOM nation, and our leaders seem to be just fine with it.

Many analysts argue that CARICOM has also failed Haiti, where its approach has been dictated by the very Western powers that have undermined Haiti since its independence. In Grenada, had CARICOM acted with a unified voice, the U.S. invasion of the island in 1983 may have been avoided.

In Guyana, the marginalization of ethnic minorities continues, but unlike in Kenya, where regional leaders worked towards finding a lasting solution, CARICOM’s leadership appears more concerned with personal interests than with the interests of their respective countries.

This self-serving leadership has caused many in the region to lose faith in CARICOM. The results have been that even institutions like the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), despite its potential advantages for regional justice, continue to be rejected by several CARICOM member states, as evidenced by referendums in Antigua and St. Vincent.

Meanwhile, LIAT struggles for survival because regional leaders cannot find a common position, and the Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME) continues to face setbacks.

A Statistical Outlier: The Evidence of a Bloated Electoral List

Country	Population (2024)	Registered Voters	% of Population Registered	% Turnout in Last Election
Guyana	~800,000	731,000	~91%	72.5%
Antigua and Barbuda	~100,335	60,916	~60.7%	70.34%
Saint Lucia	~180,000	160,465	~89.2%	53.6%
Bahamas	~400,000	187,000	~46.8%	65.0%
Uganda	~45,741,000	18,103,603	~39.6%	57.22%
Brazil	~213,993,000	156,454,011	~73.1%	79.0%
Argentina	~45,376,000	34,330,557	~75.7%	77.01%
Maldives	~540,000	264,589	~49.0%	88.2%
United Kingdom	~67,081,000	47,587,254	~70.9%	67.3%
Sao Tome and Principe	~215,000	92,639	~43.1%	68.6%

The figures presented in the above table provide indisputable statistical proof that Guyana’s electoral list is grossly bloated and cannot produce credible electoral results.

It is mathematically and demographically implausible for a country with a population of about 800,000 to have over 731,000 registered voters—an alarming 91% of the population. This is far above international norms and regional trends, making it a clear red flag for electoral fraud and manipulation.

A Direct Threat to Democracy

Organizations such as CARICOM, the OAS, and the Commonwealth cannot continue to sit idly by and ignore this blatant threat to democracy. If these bodies remain silent in the face of such anomalies, they forfeit their credibility and impartiality.

The fact that Guyana is now a petro-state should not tempt these organizations’ leadership into succumbing to political patronage and turning a blind eye to electoral malpractices.

Guyana Clearly Stands Out as an Outlier

The randomly selected figures in the table above expose how abnormal Guyana’s voters’ list is when compared to other nations with similar demographics. In countries with an average age close to Guyana’s 25 years, such as:

• Bahamas (average age: 32 years)
• Uganda (average age: 17 years)
• Maldives (average age: 29 years)
• Fiji (average age: 28 years)

the voter registration rate does not exceed 60% of the total population. In stark contrast, Guyana’s voter registration rate is an astronomical 91%, a 31% discrepancy compared to similar countries.

Why Do Brazil and Argentina Have Higher Numbers?

Defenders of Guyana’s bloated electoral list often cite countries like Brazil, Argentina, and the UK, arguing that high voter registration is not unique to Guyana. However, there are fundamental differences between these nations and Guyana:

1. Older Populations:
   • Brazil’s average age: 34 years
   • Argentina’s average age: 33 years
   • United Kingdom’s average age: 40 years

These nations have far older populations, meaning a significantly larger portion of their people are of voting age.

2. Higher Voter Turnout to Match the Voter List:
   • Brazil (2022 turnout): 79%
   • Argentina (2023 turnout): 77.01%
   • United Kingdom (2019 turnout): 67.3%

The pattern here is consistent—countries with higher voter registration rates have a correspondingly high voter turnout, unlike Guyana, which has a bloated voter list but an inconsistent turnout.

The Barbados Defense: A Flawed Comparison

The Government of Guyana frequently cites Barbados in defense of its inflated electoral list. While it is true that Barbados has a high percentage of registered voters (92.5%), there are two major issues with this comparison:

1. Barbados has a much older population than Guyana—the median age in Barbados is 39 years, meaning a larger proportion of the population is eligible to vote compared to Guyana’s much younger population.
2. Voter Turnout in Barbados’ last election was only 59.5%—which follows a regional trend of lower turnouts relative to bloated electoral lists.

A similar pattern is observed in Trinidad and Tobago, where:

• 81.3% of the population is registered to vote
• But only 58% turned out in the last election

Guyana’s Voter Turnout: What It Should Be vs. What It Is

Based on regional voting patterns, if Guyana’s voter registration rate followed the trends of Trinidad and Tobago (58%) and Barbados (59.5%), the expected voter turnout in the last three elections should have averaged around 57-60%.

However, in Guyana’s last election, turnout was 72.5%—which is unusually high given the already bloated voter list. If this trend continues into 2025, and turnout exceeds 70% again, it would statistically suggest that over 500,000 Guyanese voted—an impossibility given the country’s actual population demographics.

The Migration Argument: An Excuse That Fails Scrutiny

Defenders of the bloated voters' list argue that many Guyanese live abroad, which explains the large number of registered voters. This argument collapses under basic scrutiny for two reasons:

1. Many CARICOM nations also have large diasporas, yet their voter lists are not as bloated.
   • Jamaica and Trinidad & Tobago have millions of nationals overseas, yet their voter registration numbers remain proportionate to their populations. Why is Guyana’s list the exception?
2. If many Guyanese migrate at a young age, the voters’ list should be smaller, not larger.
   • According to the law, a person is only registered at age 14. If significant migration occurs before 14, the number of eligible voters should be lower, not inexplicably higher.

Birth Rate Data Further Exposes Ghost Voters

Over the last 20 years, Guyana’s average birth rate has been approximately -0.77%, indicating a declining natural increase. When this is combined with migration trends, the number of registered voters should be decreasing, not increasing.

Conclusion: A Call for Immediate Action

The evidence overwhelmingly supports the conclusion that Guyana’s electoral list is not just bloated—it is deliberately inflated to allow electoral manipulation. A clean electoral process cannot take place under these conditions.

CARICOM’s silence in the face of electoral corruption is a betrayal of its role as a regional body entrusted with safeguarding democracy. If Guyana’s bloated voters’ list is not addressed, it will set a dangerous precedent for future elections. Regional and international bodies must act now. Failure to do so will render CARICOM, the OAS, and the Commonwealth irrelevant as impartial defenders of democracy.

-30-