23/06/2026
𝐑𝐞𝐠𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐂𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐝𝐫𝐞𝐧 𝐎𝐧𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐖𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐈𝐠𝐧𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐄𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐌𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧
Dear Editor,
The recent headline indicating that the Attorney General is seeking partnerships with parents, teachers, and the legal fraternity to regulate the use of social media by children raises an important national conversation for every Guyanese. Protecting children from online harm is undoubtedly a responsibility that governments, parents, educators, and technology companies must share. However, as Guyana advances its digital transformation agenda, there are broader questions that deserve equal public attention.
The People's Progressive Party/Civic administration has repeatedly spoken about digitization and modernization. We have seen discussions on digital services, electronic systems, online platforms, and technological advancement. Yet, one of the most critical areas requiring modernization remains unresolved: that is the implementation of a robust biometric identification system for elections and national verification purposes.
In the 21st century, identity verification has become a cornerstone of good governance for every democratic country. Around the world, countries increasingly utilize biometric technologies to improve security, reduce fraud, strengthen public confidence, and modernize public services. In Guyana, however, the debate over biometric voter verification continues while concerns about electoral transparency persist.
If the Government believes technology can be used to regulate children's access to social media, then surely technology can also be used to strengthen electoral integrity. It appears contradictory that digitization is enthusiastically promoted in some sectors while resistance remains strong regarding biometric verification for free and fair elections.
The discussion surrounding children's online safety is also more complex than social media alone. Many young people under the age of sixteen spend significant portions of their time on gaming platforms such as Roblox and other interactive online environments. These platforms contain chat functions and allow children to communicate with individuals from anywhere in the world. I have seen several reports and warnings from law enforcement agencies globally who have repeatedly warned about online predators who exploit these spaces to groom and manipulate minors for the benefit of sexual content or to meet up.
Therefore, any conversation about protecting children online must go beyond Facebook, TikTok, Instagram, and other traditional social media platforms. Policymakers must recognize that risks exist across the wider digital ecosystem. The question is not merely whether social media should be regulated, but whether Guyana possesses the institutional capacity, technological framework, and enforcement mechanisms necessary to protect children across all online environments.
Recent developments in the United Kingdom provide a useful point of comparison. British authorities did not arrive at stricter online safety measures overnight. Their policies emerged following years of research, public consultations, parliamentary inquiries, expert recommendations, and growing evidence concerning mental health impacts, cyberbullying, exploitation, and harmful online content. The process was data-driven and informed by extensive national debate.
Guyana must similarly ensure that any proposed regulations are evidence-based, proportionate, and respectful of constitutional rights. At the same time, we should ask why such urgency is being displayed regarding online regulation while equally significant concerns about voter identification and electoral modernization continue to be sidelined.
This contradiction was highlighted in at Nations University graduation ceremony in 2024 where Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo was giving the feature address and a bold student publicly shouted, "Biometrics for Election 2025!" The call reflected a growing sentiment among many citizens who believe biometric verification would enhance confidence in the electoral process. Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo initially appeared reluctant to engage the issue and later referenced concerns regarding the constitutionality of biometrics. Yet this position appears inconsistent with previous public discussions where biometric systems have been acknowledged as technologically feasible solutions.
The Government cannot champion digitization while selectively rejecting technological reforms that promote transparency and accountability. If technology is trusted to regulate children online, improve government services, and modernize public administration, then the same technological principles should be seriously examined in the context of elections.
The protection of children and the integrity of elections are both matters of national importance. Neither issue should be approached selectively or politically. Guyana deserves a comprehensive digital vision, one that safeguards our children, protects our democracy, and embraces technological innovation wherever it serves the public interest.
Sincerely,
Onix A. Duncan
Politician/Advocate
