NO COURT IS ABOVE THE CONSTITUTION

Mar 13, 2019 Letters

---

 

DEAR EDITOR,

The diplomatic and donor community must be looking on with bated breath at the developing situation in Guyana as it self-propels towards a constitutional crisis.
The situation is made even more comical with a recent epistle by ‘one of Guyana’s leading legal minds’ who claimed:
“… The court could rely on the doctrine of necessity and give such extensions as are required in the circumstances…far as I am concerned, there is no constitutional crisis except in the imaginations of one or another Charlatan who, at the end of the day are incapable of giving a rational and consistent construction of the Constitution.”
The implication here is that those, including Ralph Ramkarran, Anil Nandlall, Christopher Ram and the Editors of independent media houses who, thus far, have alerted the nation to an impending constitutional crisis are ‘charlatans and incapable of giving a rational and consistent construction of the Constitution.’
Three cheers for Mr. Maxwell Edwards, only he can, gloomy forecasts notwithstanding.
To the layman, no court is above the constitution. The constitution is supreme. The court must follow what the constitution says.
President Granger swore to uphold the constitution. He cannot arbitrarily ‘dis’ what the constitution says. He must obey what he swore to uphold.
Since the constitution says elections must be held in 90 days, then so be it. And if GECOM has housekeeping issues that need to be resolved then it must solve those issues with the 90 day time frame allotted to it by the constitution. End of story!
The President invited the entire Commission to meet with him because he wanted to telegraph to the public that the Commission is divided. He got exactly what he wanted and went away with a wry smile on his face.
There is much talk about a day of reckoning come March 21, and questions are being asked whether those military veterans who currently hold office, and tend to be conservative, can rebalance an economy tilted on the downside and, become believers in democratic governance.
The preponderance of a phenomenon known as ‘Confirmation Bias’ has now become a potent weapon in the hands of the leadership of the APNU+ AFC, and is currently being used to mislead and misguide its supporters.
When their followers are being told that the political opposition and others have it all wrong in respect to government’s obligations with the passage of the No Confidence Motion (NCM) as well as the prospects of a constitutional crisis, they tend to block out ideas, facts or data that don’t coincide with what they were told by Mr. Granger and company and as a consequence, fall victim to the ‘Confirmation Bias’ syndrome.
Differences over the role and place of GECOM and its competence to produce a credible voters list has been around long before GECOM became GECOM.
We only have to cast our minds back to Sir Donald Jackson’s and Sir Harold Bollers’ tenures at the then Elections Commission to understand why Mr Patterson was appointed Chairman of GECOM by President Granger.
Further, the documentary titled, THE TRAIL OF THE VANISHING VOTER’ and the tagging of the Elections Commission by Lord Avebury a ‘Toothless Poodle’ continue to be relevant even as we try to understand why we are where we are today.
On top of this is the failure of the relevant authorities to implement the recommendations to be found in reports by the International Observer Missions and GECOM retreats following elections held in Guyana since 1992.
The call made in an editorial of the Guyana Chronicle in September 2016, headlined, ‘Time to revamp GECOM’ was a wakeup call alerting the nation to the administration’s intention to ditch the Carter Center Formula for selecting a Chairman for GECOM.
That call was a harbinger to the jettisoning of the constitutional provision by government causing it to ride roughshod over the supreme law of the land, and to appoint unilaterally, on November 19, 2017 Mr. James Patterson as chairman of GECOM.
But this was neither the first nor the last of such unconscionable acts by the coalition administration to violate the Constitution.
It is to be recalled that in mid-November 2017, the President, through Mr. Joseph Harmon had sent a letter to the Police Service Commission directing that all police promotions be halted claiming that ‘complaints had been received about the police.’
On November 23, 2017 the Chief Justice ruled that ‘the directive by the Minister of State was unlawful and a blatant disrespect for the Constitution; similar misdemeanours were committed by Ministers Ramjattan and Broomes.
Broomes had written on May 28, 2015 to the Public Service Commission directing that ‘all interviews and meetings of the Commission are to cease forthwith until further (sic) as instructed by his Excellency David Arthur Granger’s notice.’
Chief Justice Chang ruled that ‘the directive was in violation of Article 226 of the Constitution and as a consequence was unlawful, null and void and if no legal effect.’
In early June 2015, contrary to the rules of the Police Service Commission and the Constitution, Ramjattan wrote to the then Commissioner of Police instructing him to terminate the service of a senior rank of the Guyana Police Force for his alleged involvement in a torture case.
Under pressure, Ramjattan withdrew his directive, which was proven to be misdirected.
I highlight these examples not only to demonstrate the many instances where the coalition administration violated the constitution in order to achieve its selfish goals, but to emphasize how manipulative it can be, in its determination to achieve a particular outcome by violating the constitution as a means to an end favourable the coalition administration.
The point is, when Mr. Granger invokes such a deceptive narrative that; “Government will not interfere or intrude in the work of GECOM,” his administration cannot be trusted on such matters precisely because his track record reflects quite the opposite as was illustrated earlier.
To believe Mr Granger this time around would be to allow him to get away with saying things that don’t square with the facts nor reality, and to allow him once again, to throw dust in the eyes of the average person.
Mr Granger will behave ‘fit and proper’ when it suits him and then turn around and behave deplorably in other situations.
On the one hand, he would say; “My government would abide by the constitutional requirements following passage of the NCM” and that “My government would do everything to facilitate smooth elections.”
Later, the same President would turn around and claim that the Opposition is “All bluff” and that members of GECOM must go back and “settle their differences and try to come to some reconciliation over a bloated voters list.”
This is cynicism at its best since Mr. Granger knows full well that the Chairman and the three government backed commissioners have instructions that coincide fully with his administration’s interest in dragging-out GECOM’S work plan using House-to-House registration as a subterfuge to achieve that goal which, according to Mr Alexander, “can be concluded by November 2019!”
And as if the cynicism has no limit, only last year, on December 17 to be exact, the President told reporters, “I have full confidence in the elections machinery” and that “I would make sure that nothing is done to have any improperly conducted elections.”
The President went on to say, “I have never rigged an election in my life. I have no intention of ever doing so.” Whether Mr Granger was in a position to rig past elections or not, the point is, there is still a lingering perception that as commander of the GDF in 1972, he was involved when the army took control of the ballot boxes.
Forty-seven years later, Mr. Granger is President of Guyana and leader of the ruling APNU+AFC coalition, that puts him in an advantageous position to influence the outcome of the elections especially in light of a GECOM and an election machinery that is weighted in his favour and, more-so, given the suggestive day to day maneuverings Initiated by his administration.
The coalition administration has publicly stated that the voters list used in the 2015 elections was ‘padded in favour of the PPP/C and, had that list not been padded the Coalition would have won by a wider margin.’
The argument goes that, the new house-to- house registration envisaged will remove the padding favorable to the PPP/C and replace it with a list padded in favour of the APNU+AFC thus enabling it to win the upcoming election by a much wider margin!
This is why the APNU+ AFC so desperately needs time.
Guyanese must prevent this from happening using all legal and constitutional means of struggle through unity of action at all levels on the political, industrial and social fronts.

Yours faithfully,
Clement J. Rohee

---

---