In constituency voting Anil Nandlall wouldn’t win his seat

Oct 15, 2017 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
Please permit me some space to respond to two letters written by Anil Nandalall on CR. The first “No need for constitutional reform commission by way of ordinary law.”KN july 11th 2017. Anil quite rightly cited that: “The Government was boxed in a corner last February, when a United Nations team visited Guyana to review the state of constitutional reform in the country. The Government was forced to give a commitment to accelerate the process. This was followed by similar intervention from the Carter Center in collaboration with the United Kingdom (UK), in April this year.
“Massa cracked his whip.” “The Coalition could not dither.” Notice Anil’s choice of words, “intervention” and “Massa cracked his whip”. These words are synonymous with dictators and in sync with the PPP. Albeit, the Carter Center was not seen by the PPP as an interventionist in 1992 when they paved the way for the return of democracy to Guyana- the Center was seen more like a knight in shining armor to the PPP then.
Anil then rambles around with article 119 which had created the Standing Committee on Constitutional Reform in 2001 to expose Nagamootoo’s gerrymandering with his “Constitutional Reform Consultative Bill” and finishes with.”The process is going nowhere in the near future.” Not that Anil or his cohorts in the PPP want CR to go anywhere in the near or distant future.
In his second letter; “Are foreign interest driving the haste for constitutional reform.”Anil begins with, “Our Constitution is the supreme law of our country” and it is “aimed at regulating public affairs and the role and responsibility of public officials and institutions.” Let’s deviate a little from “supreme” to ordinary law. If a citizen is caught smoking a piece of weed-a victimless crime- there is a jail time assigned as penalty. The punishment for a crime is not so much intended for the perpetrator, but to act as a deterrent for others who may contemplate committing a crime of the said nature – penalty induces deterrence -deterrence is the mother of compliance.
How supreme is the supreme law of our country to regulate the role and responsibility of public officials without any penalty for deviation or lack of compliance? Surely, Anil will know better given his complicity in the removal of the Lexus Nexus law books from the AG’s office, unscathed.
Anil acknowledges the need for our constitution to remain “dynamic and under constant review with a view of reform” but he does not see the drastic changes in the last 17 years since the last reform to “precipitate the monumental constitutional reforms which are now being contemplated.
Anil must have been in a coma in July 2015 -after the PPP were voted out of power and Nagamootoo had not lost his honesty at that time and had started talks with the UNDP representatives on CR. How could he not know that foreign help was invited by the PM? How could he not know that the Carter Center had suggested that private candidate should be allowed to contest for the national assembly and the presidency?
He is aware that the British (his feared massa) suggested that we do not have to reinvent the wheel in CR; yet he screams of “monumental constitutional reforms which are now being contemplated”. Despite knowing, Anil does not mention a single word about what the “foreign interest” suggest is needed in our CR in his missives, because he contemplates that he lacks the charisma to win in the constituency in which he lived as a private or PPP sponsored candidate, even if he is given the chance to rotate the geographical boundary 360 degrees around his home.
That goes for most of the PPP leaders-they carry too much baggage. Anil in his missive, hilariously pretends to wonder if the reforms sought would seek to remove the protective insulation which clothed the constitutional commissions so that they can actually be directed and influenced by extraneous bodies.”Ludicrous! Anil spoke of two service commissions being stop from doing their duty by the president as a clear violation of the constitution. He spoke of all opposition leaders withholding their submissions of names for the president to appoint personnel to the two judicial positions since it was made possible since 2001.
He mentioned the 18 names submitted where the constitution had required six for the selection of a GECOM chairman-with no selection as yet by the president. Notwithstanding all the above contradictions, Anil posited; “Does that render the constitution ineffective and unworkable, to justify its reform? I think not.”Yet! In the end he confesses that, “Simple and clear language of the constitution has suddenly become obscure, ambiguous and unequivocal.” You have to be a member of this man’s “fan club” to not see him grinding his own axe. Rudolph Singh

---

---