Were we to uphold the constitution, this society would have been further along the continuum

Dec 02, 2012 Letters

---

 

DEAR EDITOR,
Lou Rawls croons, “What’s the matter with the world/ Has the world gone mad/ Nothing’s wrong with the world/ It’s the people that’s in it.” These lyrics are used to draw an analogy to our political system and our response, or lack thereof to it.
Many will admit Guyana is far from being a perfect society. But so too are many other countries, including the most developed. However, should time be taken to examine and emulate what creates the sense of perfection often admired in other countries and what continues to blight ours, we will find one commonality – human behaviour.
For right-thinking persons, politics is about people and people’s development. And while it is correctly believed that politics is about seeking and retaining power, such power does not have to operate at the exclusion and oppression of others, nor plunder the nation’s resources.
For instance, the USA, often used as a model country for democracy and continues to secure the admiration of many at home, has inherent imperfections and a contract with the people, via the Constitution, to create a perfect society where all are treated equally and can pursue a life of happiness and liberty. A promise the citizens take seriously, as evident in their constant struggles, or “civil wars” as called by Chris Matthews, MSNBC’s Hardball host.
And whereas similar assurance of a “perfect nation” is guaranteed us in the Guyana Constitution, the “quest”, struggles/civil wars to maintain and secure the contract are seen as hindrance and disturbance to the ‘social order’ by the dominant few and often demonised or ostracised. So while the USA celebrates these normal trends in human evolution, they are condemned and shunned at home.
Some such struggles/wars are seen for racial, gender, worker and sexual equality, facilitated by free speech, assembly and association, and protected in both constitutions, yet at home there is disparity in activism and respect for such activism.
Further examination of the two constitutions reveals stark similarities and differences. For instance, while present in the Guyana Constitution is the female pronoun and the protection under Article 149F to “entitled equal rights … [and protection from] All forms of discrimination,” since 1923, women in the USA have been fighting for the said insertion and equality under the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). And whereas women in the 2012 USA elections celebrated the historic gain of 20 percent in the Senate, leading to heightened public conversations on the struggle for gender equality, at home even though Article 160 of the Constitution and People’s Representative Act guarantee women “at least one-third” representation in the National Assembly, this mandate continues to be violated by the political leaders, with few speaking out against the injustice.
The superiority of the Guyana Constitution to the USA on Women’s issues is clearly evident, yet the violations of women intensify, even as we are empowered to end it. And while it will require more fights to make the ERA a reality, it has however not prevented laws, societal or presidential actions towards gender equality. Some examples are the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, Equal Employment Opportunity Laws, Violence Against Women Act, more women holding leading positions in the Judiciary, Executive and Legislature and elsewhere. The same case is made on sexual orientation, race and other workers’ welfare.
Understandingly these are not easy topics or pleasantry for many. But our failure to address these matters in an honest and forthright manner that respects the constitutional rights of all to be protected from discrimination, even as the USA and other countries fight these wars and celebrate the victories, are more an indictment on our attitude in standing up and fighting for what is just and fair, regardless of who is affected by and benefit from our actions.
Change is never easy, nor does it come without a struggle/war. And whereas November 28, 2011 brought a change, in many ways this change is still to prove rewarding as noise replaces nuance, inanity trumps initiative, and substantive understanding is lost on dealing with the new dispensation.
And whereas the Presidency/Executive in both countries can be secured based on a popular or minority vote, Guyanese are in a quandary to adapt to an inherent reality. Equally as confusion and misinformation hold sway for the possibility of the legislature not being in the control of the party that forms the executive. The inherent possibilities these opportunities present to advance accountable and prudent management of the country are lost to many. Further, whereas both constitutions guarantee the “Independence and Administrative autonomy of the Courts” (Guyana Constitution Article 122A) action awaits at our legislative arm to insulate this body.
Additionally, on the signing of bills into law, both countries vest the authority in the President (Guyana, Article 170; USA, Section 7). Unfortunately at home this gives rise to arguments about a ‘flawed’ constitution, the ‘supremacy’ of the president, and the president being given the impression that he can refuse to assent to bills at his whims and fancies, absent an explanation/objection to the legislature, as both constitutions require of the presidents.
And since both constitutions vest ultimate power in the people, in that this is generally taken seriously in the USA with many going to battles to protect it, and at home excuses/reasons abound why the people must not apply their power, it hinders our struggles for empowerment/advancement. So as other countries take the right to self-determination seriously and leaders are reminded they represent the people’s interests and are so held accountable, Guyanese are being socialised to think self-determination is only political independence.
Unfortunately too, many are being conditioned to see democracy only through the prism of so-called free and fair elections, yet such elections are marred by political/racial intimidation, have seen political party robbed their parliamentary seat (AFC 2006), almost lost their seat (APNU 2011), imbalanced campaign finances, abuse of state resources, media marginalization, vitiation by the High Court (1997) and have not been free from fear.
Ours is a ‘democracy’ that is also plagued by wanton denial of fundamental rights, freedoms and liberties; political leaders are contemptuous of the people, and governments are allowed to plunder our resources.
Finally, the blame for the political tyranny and degeneracy in this society does not reside in the Constitution, it resides in its gross misunderstanding, the failure to implement and adhere, and the people not using the power vested in them under this Supreme Law to stand up for what’s theirs.
For were we to uphold the constitution and emulate the admired Americans, this society would have been further along the continuum. And as Lou Rawls continues, “Attitudes have to change/The way we think must be re-arranged/ Sacrifice for a better way of life…You and me we can make it better, we can make it right”
Lincoln Lewis

---

---