Time to consider removing term limits

May 18, 2009 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

Guyana has had an inauspicious introduction to term limits for the Presidency. It has proven to be disastrous for Guyana even before it has been tried and tested.

Admittedly, when term limits were first proposed it was well intentioned. Limiting the President of Guyana to only two terms was seen as means of preventing any one individual becoming so powerful as to become a permanent fixture.

Term limits also helped to add creative dynamism and freshness to local politics since the electorate was assured that they would not be stuck with anyone but would have the benefit of at least a new President every two terms. Terms limits therefore seemed a progressive measure when adopted.

It has however turned out to be a nightmare and for all the wrong reasons. The second and final term of President Bharrat Jagdeo has turned out to be a nightmare for Guyanese. Despite the political calm and stability that has greeted this second elected term of President Jagdeo, Guyana has rolled from crisis to crisis and controversy to controversy. The government is seemingly doing as it pleases without any regard for the future of this country.

The latest travesty is the pitiful excuse rendered by the administration to explain the proposed sale of its 20% interest in the Guyana Telephone and Telegraph Company.

Instead of explaining the rationale behind the disposal of these highly valuable shares, the government proceeds to indicate that it will use the proceeds of this sale to subsidise bandwidth to the Guyanese people.

Well, why instead of subsidising something that would still be unaffordable to eighty per cent of its citizens, the government did not instead sell these shares at subsidised rates to the workers of the company? After all, the government claims it is a working class government.

Who will benefit from this sale of shares? Two sets of persons will benefit. Firstly, it will be those that are able to afford to buy these shares and it could well be the 80% shareholder in the telephone company. And secondly, since we are told that the proceeds of the sale will be used to subsidise bandwidth, it will be whichever companies are providing this service since with a subsidised cost more and more customers will come their way.

The government has exposed itself by positing this reason for the sale of the shares. Guyana does not need a subsidy to make bandwidth; Guyana needs competition in the telecommunication sector.

The Office of the President is now responsible for the issuance of licences and it is to this office, which providers of bandwidth will have to apply for permission. What guarantees will there be that the process of issuing licences will be fair? What will be the basis upon which licences will be granted? Will it be the same that is being applied to grant licences to cable operators? I am yet to see any public tender inviting persons interested in providing cable television to Guyana to tender for a permit.

It is to issues like these and others that have raised concerns about term limits for the Presidency of Guyana.

In this the final term of President Jagdeo we have had a less than impressive record of governance and since the President no longer has to face the electorate, it has been argued that there is little compulsion for him to seek to improve on this record.

His party however has to face the polls in two years time and they must be worried about what passes for governance at the moment.

The ruling Peoples Progressive Party therefore needs to intervene and urge the administration to take stock of what is taking place, and especially the deviations from protecting and enhancing the position of the working class in Guyana.

The PPP also needs to seriously address this issue of term limits. Not to hand anyone an additional term but to ensure that the final term of any future President is not marked by the same clairvoyance which characterises this the final term of the 2006 Presidency.

The Presidency of Guyana is a powerful office, and one that can easily marginalise the ruling party. The party may assume that come the next elections it can alter than record.

However, it may be too late because the electorate may be so alienated from the policies of the government that it may opt to not return the ruling party.

In this scenario of an all powerful Presidency, it is important that all political stakeholders consider whether it would not be better to reduce the powers of the President and to remove term limits so that greater political accountability can take place.

Latest News

Time to consider removing term limits

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | December, 2nd, 2024

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

UDFA Year-End Futsal Tournament kicks off December 15

Jaker, Taijul and Rana script Bangladesh’s...

Trophy Stall and Superbet on board with Kashif...

Jai Hind Jaguars trounce North Soesdyke Masters...

BMC invites clubs/teams to register for the 2025...

ASK-G holds successful Karate Grading

Features/Columnists

Deeply concerned about political dysfunction in society

Haiti: Tragically Descending into Deeper Crisis

Wanted Pathfinders

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

Time to consider removing term limits

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | December, 2nd, 2024

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Features/Columnists

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]