Pundits split on CARICOM election observers 

Two leading political scientists are divided over Prime Minister Mia Mottley’s decision to invite independent CARICOM and Commonwealth observers to monitor the February 11 general election, in her bid to reassure voters amid claims of irregularities on the electoral roll.

The early announcement of the election has drawn criticism from opposition parties, who describe it as a snap poll and have raised concerns about discrepancies in the voters’ list managed by the Electoral and Boundaries Commission (EBC). On Monday, Democratic Labour Party leader Ralph Thorne called for the election to be postponed, citing issues with the list and the need for more time to rectify discrepancies.

Responding on Tuesday, Prime Minister Mottley said she could not alter the election date under Section 18 Representation of the People Act. 

Mottley added that after consulting the CARICOM Secretary General and the Secretary General of the Commonwealth, she had decided to invite independent observers to ensure the integrity of the electoral process.

 “It is important to invite independent electoral observers so that the public can judge the conduct of our elections for themselves,” the prime minister said. “You don’t have to listen to me. You don’t have to listen to any of us. Let the independent observers cast a judgment on the conduct of elections in this country. It is an unfortunate moment, but it is a necessary moment to protect the integrity and good name of this country.”

Political scientist Dr Kristina Hinds welcomed the decision, describing it as long overdue and a necessary step to safeguard Barbados’ electoral processes.

 “This will ensure our elections are indeed free and fair, and it will also help us identify areas where we can improve our processes,” Dr Hinds said. “What we will see after these observers come is where there are areas in which we need to improve, where we are doing things well, and this is always beneficial.”

She noted that while observers may highlight procedural discrepancies, they may not immediately help voters who have been left off the list.

 “It’s not going to help persons who have been disenfranchised, whose names have been left off the list, but it may assist in the future to ensure there are improvements in these sorts of processes,” Dr Hinds said. “This report or these reports should provide some information about political involvement in the Electoral and Boundaries Commission, which can give the public either comfort or reasons to ask further questions about what is done within the Commission.”

Dr Hinds added that the observers’ visit may help clarify the EBC’s processes for those who are sceptical and provide insights into where Barbados may have fallen short and what can be improved.

 “It should provide some information on whether there were any irregularities, whether there is political interference, as well as, even if there are no irregularities, the sorts of improvements that the observers might note,” she said.

But political analyst Dr George Belle disagreed with the decision to invite observers, arguing that claims of electoral irregularities must be backed by evidence.

He said: “I think it would be incumbent on the persons who are making the charges to justify them, and that can only be done by providing evidence, by hard numbers of the people that have been negatively impacted. If they can provide that evidence, then we have a basis for the prime minister’s intervention.” 

That intervention would be justified only to prevent unfounded accusations from damaging Barbados’ reputation, he added. “She will be doing it on the basis of making sure that the accusations do not get legs because she is saying that she’s trying to protect the reputation of Barbados.”

Dr Belle warned that accusations made irresponsibly could harm the country’s image. Without evidence, he argued, there is no justification for altering election processes or timelines.

“The onus is really on those who are making the accusations to prove their stance,” Dr Belle said. “They have to bring forward the names and the people that are impacted in this way, comparatively sufficiently, to present that this is an extraordinarily problematic situation on this occasion.”