GEORGETOWN – The legal battle for voter equality has ended in a stunning and costly defeat for the Forward Guyana Movement (FGM), but the party is warning that the Court of Appeal’s ruling has created a dangerous imbalance that threatens fundamental democratic rights.
While the Court rejected the FGM’s challenge, the party has vowed to fight on, suggesting the matter will ultimately be decided by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).The FGM’s core argument, brought by citizen Krystal Fisher, was that the ruling creates an “unjust imbalance” by allegedly tying a citizen’s right to vote for presidential and national candidates to whether their chosen party contests a local, geographic constituency seat.
The Movement emphasized the political irony: the system allegedly denies some Guyanese the full range of choices, yet grants full access to foreign nationals who meet simple residency requirements. FGM stressed that the judgment undermines the principle that “every eligible voter in all ten regions must have equal opportunity to decide the country’s leadership.”
The ruling, however, represents a strong victory for the integrity of electoral law and the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM). The Court found that GECOM acted lawfully under the Constitution and the Representation of the People Act (ROPA). The Acting Chancellor of the Judiciary, Justice Roxane George, ruled that the application had “no merit,” pointing out that it was the FGM itself that allegedly denied its supporters the right to vote by failing to field candidates in the correct constituencies.
The judicial branch effectively prioritized strict adherence to electoral legislation over the FGM’s claim of constitutional suffrage. Compounding the FGM’s loss, the Court imposed a massive financial penalty, ordering the party to pay $1 million in costs to the respondents (GECOM and the Attorney General) by November 14.
The FGM fiercely condemned this punitive measure, claiming that using high costs in public-interest cases has a “chilling and deleterious effect on the administration of justice.” They pointed to the CCJ’s earlier decision in the Christopher Jones matter, where the regional court vacated costs to avoid burdening citizens who seek constitutional clarity.
The Forward Guyana Movement concluded the statement with a dramatic call to action, declaring, “This fight is bigger than one case; it is about the future of democracy in Guyana.” The group urged the public and civil society to unite in defense of universal adult suffrage, warning that justice must not be selective
