SAVING CHRISTMAS!

Sep 12, 2014 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

The National Communications Network (NCN) has a morning show. It is a good programme, except that the hosts tend to talk too much to each other. If half of the time they spend discussing topics amongst themselves was devoted to interviewing and highlighting guests, the programme would be an excellent one.
Yesterday morning one of their little dialogues caught my attention. They were commenting on the verdict in the Oscar Pistorius trial. At the time they began discussing this, the full verdict was not yet out. The judge had merely taken a recess after addressing the issue of murder. The announcers however were clearly not aware that only a partial judgment at the time had been delivered. They therefore went on about Oscar Pistorius being freed. He was not at the time, because the judge was still to address the charge of culpable homicide or manslaughter for which Pistorius could still face a custodial sentence.
I am an early riser and therefore was following all along the judgment as it unfolded. At the time the two hosts of the NCN Morning Show made their comments, the full judgment had still not yet been delivered. As this is being written it still has not. But by the time this column is read today, it would have.
What is the moral in all of this? It is that we should not be too hasty in rushing to judgment until we have all the facts. Unfortunately in Guyana there is too much haste in rushing to judgement of others. The government rescinds a contract and we rush to judgment without hearing the company’s side. Someone is charged for an offence and that person is deemed guilty in the eyes of the public even before a shred of evidence is led.
We should not be hasty in judging others. I make this point in commending the approach taken by the government in relation to the so-called ultimatum that APNU has issued in relation to the holding of local government elections. The government has not rushed to judgment on the demand by APNU for the holding of local government elections.
It would have been enticing for the government to have rejected outright APNU making such a demand. But this has not been the approach of Donald Ramotar. He has instead expressed an interest in learning more about this demand and also about the possible motives behind it. The Ramotar administration has not in an outright manner rejected the demand by APNU. Neither has the demand been viewed as an ultimatum.
The initial assessment by the government was that the demand was a strategic move on the part of the main opposition. This cautious, considered and measured approach by the Donald Ramotar administration differentiates it from the Jagdeo regime. There has been no hastiness.
What should happen now is that the leader of APNU should be invited to discuss the letter that he sent to the President. After there has been clarification of the motives of the letter, it is advisable that both sides sit down and develop a roadmap towards local government elections.
This will involve some amount of political compromise. It should also recognize that there are certain modalities that need to be put in place before local government elections are held.
The roadmap should incorporate signposts that address the key concerns of each side. On APNU’s side there is the concern over a Local Government Bill that has not been given assent by the President. The government feels that the Bill is unconstitutional, in that it grants to the proposed Local Government Commission powers that are outlined for the Commission under the Constitution.
One compromise can be that the opposition approaches the Courts for a declaration on this point, and this approach be without prejudice to the right to appeal any such decision which the opposition may find objectionable.
On the government side, there is the issue of the readiness of GECOM to undertake local government elections. The government has issues over the lack of public education about the new system to be employed for Local Government Elections (LGE). It also has problems with the integrity of the Preliminary Voters’ List (PVL) and the readiness of GECOM to undertake LGE at this time.
A suitable compromise here would be that both sides agree to approach either the Carter Centre or the UNDP to have an assessment done about GECOM’s state of readiness for this poll, the integrity of the PVL, and the degree of lack of public awareness of the new electoral system to be employed for local government polls.
If both sides can find common ground on these issues and arrive at a roadmap for the holding of local government elections, it will be a landmark agreement, the effects of which can lead to the building of greater trust between the political parties.
It will also save Christmas 2014.

---

---