CREATIVE PROTESTS

Sep 28, 2014 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

I am still waiting for APNU to hold firm to its commitment to seek the advice of the Courts in relation to the spending of monies not approved of by the National Assembly. One leading light of APNU had promised that the Courts would have been approached to pronounce on the constitutionality of the Minister restoring funds not approved by the Assembly.
It is regrettable that this has not been done, more so since one of the grounds originally advanced as necessitating the movement towards a no-confidence motion against the government was that this spending had flaunted the authority of the Assembly.  A ruling on the legality and constitutionality of the spending would also have implications for the Committee of Privileges, which is supposed to be dealing with this issue.
I suppose one can ignore that ridiculous pronouncement subsequently made that the Courts should only advise the Assembly. I have never heard so much nonsense in my life. If the Courts should only advise the National Assembly then what should it do to the Executive? There are three arms of the State. And if the same policy is to be adopted in respect to the relationship between the Judiciary and the Executive, it would mean that the decisions of the Judiciary would become mere advisory or declaratory towards the State.
This means that any citizen who has a problem with the government and seeks redress from the Courts is merely seeking an advisory declaration and not an enforceable edict. Such a situation would cause the entire structure of the State to fall to pieces.
The Courts are the guardians of the Constitution, and in defending the Constitution, the Courts may make such orders and give such directions which the legislature is bound to comply with. The very Constitution, however, provides for the Courts to not have jurisdiction over the internal rules of the National Assembly, and throughout the history of jurisprudence in Guyana, this has been respected.
The Courts have both overturned legislation as being unconstitutional as well as refused to dictate the internal working of the Assembly. Therefore, there is no reason why anyone should be scared of approaching the courts to determine whether the actions of the Minister of Finance, in restoring funds not approved by the National Assembly, has acted in breach of the Constitution and the law.
This point is made against the backdrop of protests that are taking place in the country, pressing for the holding of local government elections. And it has been noted that one senior light in APNU has recognized the need for APNU to be more creative with protests, mindful of the problems that have been generated as a result of political protests in the past.
Protest should have a purpose. Even the government protests creatively with a purpose. Just recently when there was a threat to raise the fares for minibuses, the government creatively protested by bringing some big buses on the road. This forced the minibuses’ associations to the negotiating table. The result was that an agreement was reached, which saw the end of the Big Bus protest.
The picketing exercises launched by APNU have not been without results. They have led to a statement by the President indicating a willingness to meet with the Leader of the Opposition to clarify certain things in relation to an ultimatum that was served on the President.
This is an important opening that should be grasped by the opposition. Creative protests should also include negotiations. APNU should seize the opening created by the President to engage him in talks about local government polls rather than through the media.
As mentioned before in this column, both sides have concerns over which there can be compromise. The President has deemed a local government Bill passed in the National Assembly as not being constitutional. There is an easy way to settle this issue. Both sides should agree to have the matter pronounced upon by the competent judicial authorities.
The government on the other hand has made the excuse that GECOM may not be ready for elections. There may be considerable merit in this, seeing that since 2008, GECOM is said to have received the information about Arthur Chung’s death. Yet six years onwards his name still remains on the List of Electors.
Is GECOM really ready for elections? There is a creative way to deal with this issue. Both APNU and the government should agree to have an independent assessment done of GECOM’s readiness as well as of the integrity of the List of Electors.
Instead of protesting along the streets of Guyana, APNU should protest around the negotiating table. It should accept the invitation by the President for negotiations. This too can be deemed a form of creative protest.

---

---