Dear Editor,
The Guyana Court of Appeal has, on Thursday, October 18, 2018, upheld the decision of the Chief Justice (ag) in regard to the legality of the President’s action in appointing Mr. James Patterson to Chair the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM).
As a person who had presented the PPP’s position to the Constitutional Reform Commission and was involved in the numerous struggles for democracy, I am extremely disappointed by this ruling. It is, in my view, a giant step backwards. It is another incident pushing our country along the road to social and economic ruination and towards authoritarian governance.
I was very much part of the coinage of Article 161 (2), and therefore I have personal knowledge of the reasons behind its existence; the way it evolved to its current expression, and the way that it was interpreted and applied in the past. It was never ambiguous, and never evoked any controversy over the last 25 years.
The Constitution was amended to remove the unilateral power of appointment from the President; to introduce the Leader of the Opposition into the equation, in order to achieve political consensus; and to widen the pool of persons from which the Chairman is to be chosen. What is so difficult to understand? I am sure that every objective-minded Guyanese knows this.
In the 1999-2001 Constitutional Reform Process, all the political parties unanimously agreed to constitutionalise this Carter/Price Formula. In fact the PNC were the ones that had led the charge. Their major argument then was that it is important to cement the role of the Leader of the Opposition, and to curtail the President’s power of appointment. Now that they are in Government, they are seeking to exclude the Leader of the Opposition, and increase the power of the President. Therein lies the ideological authoritarianism which exists in the belly of the PNC.
As they did from 1968 to 1992, they seem to be getting the Judiciary’s assistance to so do now. It is the very Judiciary that had allowed itself to be so cowed that Burnham was able to place a party flag in the Court of Appeal compound and against the front wall of the court building, shamelessly demonstrating to the world that the Judiciary is under the control of the PNC. This was allowed to take place by a complicit Judiciary.
It is the same Judiciary that had refused to strike down laws that introduced overseas voting, which had been used to massively rig the first elections of independent Guyana in 1968.
It is the very Judiciary that had thrown out legal challenges to every election held under the PNC from 1968 to 1985, when the world knows that each of those elections was massively rigged.
It is the same Judiciary that is now refusing to hear the PPP’s challenge to the 2015 elections, when similar challenges to elections around the world filed after the PPP’s challenge have already been decided by the courts in those countries.
Once again, in highly political matters, we see a judicial posture reminiscent of the past. I will never accept that the Court of Appeal do not know the intent of Article 161 (2). From press reports, they give the impression that they know it well. They upheld Nandlall’s submissions and rejected those of Williams, yet they ruled in favour of Williams! The decision simply cannot be justified on rational grounds.
I recall that during the days of the PNC dictatorship, when it was widely believed that judges were taking orders from the PNC, Mr. Ashton Chase, a distinguished lawyer and freedom fighter, had observed that there came a time when PNC did not have to tell the judges what to do. The judges anticipated what ruling the PNC wanted, and delivered.
Like so many other things that have been reversed since the PNC-led APNU+AFC regime took office, one wonders if we are back on that road.
It is important to note that undermining of the confidence of important institutions leads to disaster. When the Judiciary does not stand up courageously to protect society’s fundamental rights, society descends into some level of anarchy, and social and economic ruination follows.
Cheddi Jagan was always clear on this point. He never failed to point out the link and interaction between the economic base and the superstructure in any society. They influence and interact with each other.
The ruling may initially appear to be a victory for the regime, but in fact it could very well turn out to be one of the biggest blows to all working people; and to businesses and, indeed, to our country.
Fortunately, the Guyana Court of Appeal is no longer our final court; we now have the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). This is an important case for that court. I am looking forward to the decision of that court, as I know that the matter is going there.
Sincerely,
Donald Ramotar
Former President
