Challenging the President’s immunity

Jul 14, 2009 Editorial

There have always been challenges to the Constitution and it seems that there will be even more with the promised challenge to the immunity enjoyed by the President coming into question. The President is immune from prosecution for any act committed while in office.
Not so long ago, lawyers representing Mr. Chandra Narine Sharma who was challenging a four-month ban applied to his television station for defaming the administration and for irresponsible reporting, sought to get the president in court. They argued that the Minister of Information, who also happens to be the President should be made to appear in court to justify the action.

The court ruled that the President could not be summoned before a court of law but the lawyers argued that they were summoning the Information Minister. This would have necessitated separating the Information Minister from the President, something that is an impossibility.
Now a former political colleague of the president, Khemraj Ramjattan, is once more challenging the immunity. This time he is hinting about a suit against the President for slander. He claims that the President accused him of a dishonest act, to wit, selling a duty free concession granted to him in his capacity as a Member of Parliament.

Ramjattan, a lawyer, denies the allegation and he claims that the president slandered him, and that he could only seek redress in the court. He said that he is certain that the framers of the constitution never intended that the President could walk into a room and commit an illegal act with impunity.
This is indeed a most interesting argument. At face value, the President could shoot a man in the streets and walk way, safe in the knowledge that he could not be prosecuted. If indeed this is the case, then people need to be afraid because the President, under the constitution, has the power of life and death.
The President can sue, however. If someone libels or slanders the Head of State, the latter can move to the courts against the defamer. This is certainly a one-sided situation and suggests that there is a great inequality in the land.

There have been criticisms of the absolute right that resides in the presidency. In fact, when what is now the ruling party was in the opposition, its members and leaders all criticised the powers that resided in the Presidency. On the campaign trail, the late Dr Cheddi Jagan, who was to accede to the presidency, pledged to seek the modification of the constitution to reduce the powers vested in the President. That was almost seventeen years ago. He died without honouring that promise.
Prime Minister Sam Hinds was more or less an interim President so he was not expected to make any change and he surely did not. President Janet Jagan also enjoyed the absolute privileges of the presidency and the current head of State, President Bharrat Jagdeo seems very unlikely to tamper with the powers of that office.
What makes this absolute position rather untenable is that there are numerous accusations against people who are considered political opponents of the ruling party.

To his credit, even president Bharrat Jagdeo does not seem to abuse these powers because he tempers his criticisms. He would refrain from naming the individual who is the object of his attack, although there are veiled references. However, Ramjattan claims that the attack against him was deliberate.
He has said that he is filing a constitutional action and he expects to win. But he must first file the writ. Of course he may also be considering whether his writ will see the light of day but he must make that attempt.
It would be interesting if President Jagdeo would waive his immunity to contest this action if Mr. Ramjattan does go to court.

Indeed, there have been modifications to the constitution. One of these actually limits the number of terms a president can serve. There have been modifications on the constitution of the national Assembly as it relates to the number of women who must sit. But for some reason, neither the ruling PPP not the opposition PNCR has sought to tackle the apparent omnipotence of the President.
It must be that they are both happy with the unlimited immunity.

Latest News

Challenging the President’s immunity

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 10th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Eagles survive shaky start on Rain-affected opening day

TCL hand over trophies for Mashramani Street...

Nagassar was re-elected as President of GCUC

Herstelling and Eccles SC chalk up wins in latest...

Golden Jaguars CONCACAF home match against...

Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sport endorses...

Features/Columnists

An Open Letter to the election observer missions

OAS Secretary General Election and renewed OAS Consensus

Azruddin Mohamed development-the constants

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

Challenging the President’s immunity

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 10th, 2025

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 […]