By Marvin Cato, HGP Nightly News|
A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) Member of Parliament, Sherod Duncan, has launched a scathing attack on the United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP) assessment of the recently concluded 2025 General and Regional Elections.
Duncan contends that the international body’s positive account of the electoral process is disconnected from reality and does not align with the experiences of the media, political stakeholders, or the general public.
In a strong rebuke, the MP argued that the Guyana Elections Commission’s (GECOM) communication practices were “anything but transparent.”
Duncan highlighted that while GECOM issued roughly 20 press statements between May 1st and September 30th, 2025, they failed significantly in live engagement—the “clearest test of any communication strategy.” According to Duncan, the commission held fewer than five press conferences in total, none of which were live-streamed by the Commission itself.
“Despite live streaming being standard international practice to ensure transparency, avoid misinformation, and provide equal access to all media houses,” Duncan noted, GECOM failed to utilize the technology.
Leadership Absenteeism
Duncan further criticized the Commission for leaving the burden of communication almost entirely on the Public Relations Officer. He pointed out that the Chairperson was largely absent, appearing only once during the entire election cycle, while the CEO and DCEO frequently deferred answering critical questions.
He referenced a press conference on November 22, 2024, in which veteran journalist Gordon Moseley directly confronted the GECOM Chair, stating that she was “dodging questions.” Duncan cited this as a prime example of the press’s frustration, underscoring the gap between the UNDP’s claims and the “lived reality” of election communications in Guyana.
“Institutional Silence”
The APNU MP detailed that stakeholders had consistently complained of slow answers, inaccessible information, and unresolved queries regarding joined lists, polling agents, and the removal of deceased persons from the voter list.
“These are not the hallmarks of a functioning crisis communication protocol,” Duncan asserted. “These are signs of institutional communication strain and internal silence.”
Demanding Accountability
Perhaps most damning was Duncan’s critique of what the UNDP report omitted. He argued that the statement failed to identify remaining gaps, discuss outstanding reforms, or analyze what did not work.
“Every serious technical report includes an honest balance of strengths and shortcomings. The UNDP statement does not,” Duncan said. “Guyana needs clarity, not contradictions.”
Duncan concluded by announcing that the APNU intends to pursue parliamentary questions, motions, committee inquiries, and disclosure requests to force the whole truth about GECOM’s systems and performance onto the public record.
“We welcome UNDP’s continued commitment to Guyana, but transparency demands more than praise. It demands accuracy,” he said.
