At least one leader is obedient to the constitution and respects the judiciary

Jul 17, 2019 Letters

DEAR EDITOR,

It should not be surprising that most Guyanese are confused by the clear statements of Article 106(6) that “the Cabinet including the President shall resign … on a vote of confidence,” and Article 106(7) that “the Government shall remain in office … and shall resign after the President takes the oath of office following the election.” The CCJ has sought to explain these seemingly contradictory positions (resign / remain in office) by asserting that the government remains in office, but in an altered or “caretaker” form which is, supposedly, envisaged by the constitution and convention and suggests that the government would operate in a manner consistent with its status as an interim administration.
I am no lawyer but I would disagree with the CCJ as to both the constitutional and conventional basis for this characterisation. Any sixth-grader can clearly see that the word “caretaker” is nowhere to be found in Articles 106(6) and 106(7), specifically, or throughout the whole of the constitution, generally, and therefore has no constitutional relevance or meaning. As to convention, it is clearly misapplied to our situation. In most parliamentary democracies where a government is defeated by a no confidence motion this usually signifies that the government has lost its majority in the parliament thereby affecting its normal functioning, i.e. the ability to introduce legislation, pass bills and budgets, sign or ratify major agreements, etc., and is clearly the result of political reality and not convention. This, as I have explained on numerous occasions in these pages, is not the case here as the government has not lost its legislative majority, or its ability to govern, and to impose on itself any limitations or restrictions would constitute a breach of its oath of office and abdication of its responsibilities to the citizens of Guyana. I cannot imagine a single community, or citizen, of this country that would not be terribly disappointed and angered at any unnecessary disruption of public services and planned development as well as failure to adequately respond to natural or national disasters or threats occasioned by a shackled and ineffective government. The concept of artificially constructed, self-imposed or court-ordered restrictions on government is bizarre and irresponsible; it is neither convention or law. Fortunately, the CCJ has limited itself to expressing its opinion and wisely refrained from issuing any such orders. As such, the Cabinet should continue to meet and function as should the National Assembly and the President should take all necessary actions to ensure that general and regional elections are called at the earliest opportunity.
The CCJ also refrained from acceding to the Opposition Leader’s demands that the court make an order that the President dissolve the National Assembly and proclaim a date for elections by September 18, 2019. In fact, the CCJ observed that it was for the President, Leader of the Opposition, Parliament and the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), not the courts, to decide on the issue. This establishes a fundamental principle that an election date cannot be arbitrarily and dogmatically defined; it requires a consultative and deliberative process. The constitution provides for the President to proclaim a date for elections following the advice of GECOM and for the National Assembly to establish a date for elections following the passage of a no-confidence motion. I can find no evidence for a role for the Opposition Leader, outside of the National Assembly, in this process and he has chosen to abdicate his constitutional responsibility in favour of demagogic posturing. His demand that elections must be held within three months deliberately ignores the advice of GECOM, tendered to the President, and he has said that he would not support any parliamentary sittings, including any meetings to vote on this issue.
It is indeed fortunate that Guyana has, at least, one leader who is devoted to duty, honours his oath of office, is obedient to the constitution and respects the judiciary, in President D. A. Granger.

Sincerely,
Oscar Dolphin

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News