A quest for an unwanted intervention

Mar 22, 2012 Editorial

The constitution is the supreme law of the land. We keep hearing this statement whenever some problems develop over the rights and freedoms of the individual. However, many people are still excluded from the protection of the constitution and they have little or no perceivable recourse to correcting this situation.
The constitution specifically states that no one should be restricted in his enjoyment of his guaranteed rights and freedoms. He has freedom of association, freedom of movement and freedoms that allow him to access information.
The constitution also guarantees the man the right to life, the right to work and the right to basic things like food and shelter. However, many of these rights are not without their corresponding responsibilities. They are not absolute.
For example, a man has a right to food but he does not have a right to steal the very food he needs. He has freedom of association but he does not have the freedom to force himself upon others merely to be in association with them.
However, there are times when people are denied certain constitutional guarantees. For example, many are denied the right to information. Up until President Bharrat Jagdeo released the grip the government had on radio, the solitary radio station was state-owned. People complained that they were denied the right to access the views of the political opposition and of those that did not accord with the governments.
It was the same with television in areas outside of Georgetown. The government, for example, blocked its state-run station in places like Linden and Kwakwani from showing newscasts produced by sections of the private media.
The question that often arises is where do people go to demand that their rights and freedoms are upheld. When the government seized a piece of broadcast equipment from Vieira Communications Limited its owner, Anthony Vieira moved to the courts and won. However, that decision came long after Vieira rid himself of his network.
However, there are issues that are not so straightforward. One such has been taken to the courts and in the immediate future the courts would rule whether it has jurisdiction to hear the matter. There are three pillars of the constitution—the Executive, the Parliament and the Judiciary. Each is an independent pillar.
The interpretation is that none can intercede into the affairs of the other. The court cannot rule on the duties of the Executive neither can the Executive give directions to the court. Similarly, the activities of the parliament cannot be pronounced on by any of the other pillars.
Yet situations conspire to force people to seek the intervention of one pillar into the affairs of the other. However, the constitution does not offer a solution. Surely, the framers expected that the custodian of each pillar would conduct their business in a manner that would preclude outside intervention.
But where there is the human factor there is bound to be aberrations. There are bound to be situations that would frustrate people within one of the pillars. And so we come to the issue that has the Attorney General running to the courts over a matter that has its genesis within the walls of Parliament. There is a suggestion that there is a violation of the constitution.
If the members of parliament feel that only the courts can resolve their issue then they have no right to consider themselves parliamentarians and as people capable of making the laws of the land. This is the first time in the history of independent Guyana that the courts are being asked to determine an issue in Parliament.
It is also the first time that there is a minority government in Guyana. Governments with their majority invariably got their own way with any issue that came up for debate. This time the government is being asked to accede to the parliamentary dictates of the opposition. This rankles; it represents a new dispensation and certainly, as Dr Ashni Singh said, uncharted waters.
We are now about to witness another interesting phase of parliamentary life—the budget. This will not lead to a move to the courts but it could lead to the polls.

Latest News

A quest for an unwanted intervention

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | December, 2nd, 2024

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Dharry reigns supreme with second-round KO against Ramirez

Rutherford among nominees for ICC Men’s ODI...

Lumumba appointed Advisor to GBA

K&S/One Guyana National Futsal Championships...

Lewis, Gentle defend GTA One Guyana Open Tennis...

Zion Hickerson scores one-year sponsorship with...

Features/Columnists

Consent is not a veto

Breaking the Chains of Poverty: A need for political will

Barrels, boxes, and bills

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

A quest for an unwanted intervention

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 […]