WHAT CONSTITUTES LOCAL GOVERNMENT REFORM? Part 1

Mar 21, 2010 APNU Column, Features / Columnists

---

Over the past week, the implementation of agreed Local Government Reforms as mandated by the Guyana Constitution remained a major issue of public concern particularly, since GECOM appeared set to hold Local Government Elections, irrespective of whether those constitutional requirements had been fulfilled. 

It is appropriate, therefore, to reiterate the reasons why it was considered necessary to implement reforms, the steps taken to date and the constitutional requirements to enable an informed answer to the question: What constitutes Local Government Reform?

The need to have an objective answer is urgent in the context of remarks allegedly made by PPP General Secretary, Mr. Donald Ramotar, and reported in the Kaieteur News of March 20, 2010 under the caption, “Ramotar willing to have Local Govt. Elections under old system: reforms could be worked on and introduced when completed”.

 Mr. Ramotar knows that with the record of the PPP for implementation of decisions, such a proposal would never pass muster.

DISMAL RECORD OF HONOURING COMMITMENTS

In 2001, a similar situation arose with respect to the determination of the constituency boundaries and the number of candidates for each constituency with respect to the General and Regional Elections.

The electoral system was being amended to permit geographic constituencies to have representatives in the National Assembly of the Parliament. The issue was the determination of the number of constituencies and their boundaries. After prolonged discussions at the level of the Constitutional Reform Commission, it was finally agreed that twenty-five of the sixty-five members of Parliament would represent constituencies, but there was an impasse with respect to boundaries and the number of candidates to represent each constituency.

The Commission was in receipt of expert opinion that, once the system of Proportional Representation was being retained, the minimum number of candidates for each Constituency could not be less than two.

The PPP then suggested that Elections were urgent and should be proceeded with under the existing boundaries of the ten Regional Democratic Councils and that the exact boundaries and number of constituencies could be worked out after the 2001 General and Regional Elections.

It was obvious from the expert advice that each of the ten Regions should have at least two representatives to the Parliament, but the PPP then vigorously objected to Regions Seven, Eight and Nine having more than one representative in Parliament. Eventually, the proposal from the PPP, similar to the one now being made by Mr. Ramotar was accepted.

“Have the elections and the constituencies etc, could be worked on and introduced when completed”.  WE are in the new decade, 2010, and it has not yet been completed.

The reality has been that several attempts by the PNCR and others to have this outstanding matter “completed” have been rejected by the PPP and it reached a point of alarming disbelief when, in debating the issue of completing those electoral reforms in the National Assembly, Mr. Ramotar suffered from amnesia and posited that the intention was never to recommit the issue for further discussion.

Similarly, the Constitutional Reforms of 2001 required the Establishment of a Public Procurement Commission. Guyanese are well informed about this matter. It took years to have the legislation finally passed in the National Assembly.

That Commission is still to be appointed. This remains the case despite the Dialogue between Opposition Leader, Hoyte and President Jagdeo, the Constructive Engagement between Opposition Leader Corbin and President Jagdeo and a signed Communiqué between the President and the Leader of the Opposition on May 6, 2003 that committed to its establishment within four months of that date.

Perhaps the PPP has a different or special calendar that guides action, but, whatever may be the reasons for these events, Mr. Ramotar could NOT be serious in suggesting that the Nation relies upon PPP assurances.

AMNESIA

The PNCR in its weekly column of Sunday March 14, 2010 highlighted the fact that all political parties including, the PPP/C, had agreed that the completion of Local Government Reform was a natural prerequisite for the holding of local Government Elections. Since then, the AFC, GAP/ROAR, WPA, NFA and other stakeholders have publicly reaffirmed their position that had been publicly stated by all parliamentary opposition parties in a joint Press Statement as far back as May 2007 and repeated in another joint press statement, dated Monday November 19., 2007. Mr. Donald Ramotar appears to be suffering from another bout of amnesia’s since it was his Government through the Minister of Local Government that has repeatedly passed amendments for twelve consecutive years since 1997 to defer the holding of Local Government Elections for the expressed purpose of “completing the reform of the Local Government System in Guyana as required by the Guyana Constitution“.

CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK

Local Government reform was considered necessary to give effect to Article 12 of the Guyana Constitution, which states that,

“Local Government by freely elected representatives of the people is an integral part of the democratic organisation of the State.”

Interestingly enough, the very next Article of the Constitution states, Article 13, “The principal objective of the political system of the State is to establish an inclusionary democracy by providing increasing opportunities for the participation of citizens, and their organisations in the management and decision-making processes of the State, with particular emphasis on those areas of decision-making that directly affect their well-being“

There can be no doubt that the Local Government organs are the specifically designed to enable citizens to participate in the decision-making processes and management of their communities.

COLONIAL FRAMEWORK

The Local Government system of Guyana, however, evolved in a colonial environment and Governmental construct, which ensured that all decisions were ultimately referable to the Crown: the Queen of England, represented through Her Majesty’s Ministers.

It was never the intention that the Queen would interfere with the daily operations of the Local Authorities and Town Councils, but that there should be provisions for emergencies or exceptional circumstances when local Govt decisions conflicted in a significant way with colonial policy.

Some attempt was made to reform these laws when the new Municipal and District Councils Act, No. 24 of 1969 was enacted and subsequent amendments to Chapter 28:01 made.

Antiquated laws

The old Local Government Act, Chapter 28:02, which was first enacted since 1945, (Act 14 of 1945) and regulated the functions of Local Authorities was, however, never repealed and only amendments were made.

This fact must be noted since it is under the provisions of this Act that the present Neighbourhood Democratic Councils, NDC, are regulated. A perusal of this Act would easily confirm the enormous powers placed in the hands of the Minister.

As stated earlier, it was never contemplated that these powers were to be interpreted literally to have the Minister interfering with the daily operations of the Council. However, with the penchant, for Democratic Centralism, consecutive PPP Ministers of Local Government interpreted the law to mean that the Minister should perform as the de’ facto Governor of each Local Democratic Organ. The entire concept of “local democracy” was destroyed.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION

An examination of the 1969 Municipal and District Council Act would reveal that there was never an intention to delegate such authoritarian powers to the Minister of Local Government. Sections 95 to 115 of that Act had already provided for the establishment of a Local Government Commission that should be responsible for most of the powers vested in the Minister under the Local Government Act.

Additionally, Section 116 specifically places powers of appointment and discipline of municipal staff in the hands of the Commission and not in the Minister. In effect, the fiasco that we have witnessed at the Mayor and City Council of Georgetown should not have been legally possible. The fact is, however, that there was no Commission in existence and even if one were to be appointed now, under the existing law, there would be no real change as the Prime Minister alone would appoint such a Commission.

CREATURES OF THE MINISTER: Responsibility Without Authority

The only other significant local Government Law to have been passed before 2001 was the Local Democratic Organs Act, No 12 of 1980. This provided for the operations and functions of the new Regional Democratic Councils, but it is still a matter of serious concern whether these Councils represent any real change to enable people to make decisions and manage their communities.

A brief review will show that the Regional Democratic Councils, RDC, like the Neighbourhood Democratic Councils, NDCs, and the Town Councils are all creatures of the Minister holding much responsibility without Authority.

POWER TO THE PEOPLE

It was therefore with the desire to reverse these trends that the Constitutional Reform Commission sought to return power to the people. They did not leave any doubts about their intentions because the requisite amendments were made to the Constitution and reflected in the new provisions in Articles 71, 73A, 77A, 78A and 78B.  

The reforms under articles 72-79 of the Constitution, therefore, include:-           

· a new electoral system

· autonomy for local government

· the establishment of a local government commission

· an objective system for fiscal transfers and revenue garnering

· re introduction of village/community councils

· a system of lower ties representation on higher tiers

· a system of recall for malfunctioning councillors 

To give effect to this constitutional mandate a Task Force was established and a draft report was produced, albeit some issues such as the Electoral system and the system of fiscal transfers to Local Government bodies were not settled at the time that draft report was prepared.

This notwithstanding, the report has several recommendations which must now be the subject of legislative action.

It is important to note the requirements of the amended provisions of the Constitution make it mandatory and not discretionary for the Parliament to pass legislation to give effect to its provisions.

For example, Article 77A states, “Parliament shall by law provide” for the formulation and implementation of objective criteria for the allocation of resources t, and the garnering of resources by local democratic organs

Another example is Article 78 B, which states, “Parliament shall establish a Local Government Commission, …..”

It should be obvious to all that less than one-fifths of the directions of the Constitutional Reform Commission has been legislated, i.e. only the new Electoral Law. All others have so far been ignored.

NEW WINE IN OLD BOTTLES

It is in this context that the letter to GECOM by the Opposition Leader, dated March 16, 2010 needs to be examined. The Constitutionality of any elections under the old system as suggested by Mr. Ramotar must be questioned. Irrespective of the constitutional issue, however, Guyanese need to determine whether we ready to put new wine in old bottles.

The PNCR reiterated that it was fully mobilized and ready to participate in a properly run and constitutionally held Local Government elections but would not be lured into an exercise that would be in sharp contradiction of what the Party has repeatedly stated over the last four years.

TO BE CONTINUED

---

---