On Wednesday, President David Granger and Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo met to kick-start the process of consultation, as required by the Constitution of Guyana. This would hopefully culminate in the long overdue appointment of a Chancellor of the Judiciary and a new Chief Justice.
It came at a point and time in our history when Guyana’s Judiciary has been functioning without a substantive Chancellor since 2005, when Justice Desiree Bernard resigned from the post to take up appointment as the first female Judge at the Caribbean Court of Justice.
When Justice Bernard resigned, the substantive Chief Justice, Carl Singh, was made to act as the Chancellor, while Justice Ian Chang was elevated to the post of Chief Justice.
The two had since been acting, and neither was confirmed in those portfolios because of the failure on the part of three consecutive Presidents and two Opposition Leaders to agree on their suitability for appointment; or the suitability of other candidates, if there were others indeed nominated or courted to fill the vacancies.
It is important to note that the failure to make substantive appointments to these two key judicial postings had a largely negative impact on the morale of those operating within the administrative bureaucracy of the Judiciary and those within the legal profession over the past decade and a half.
While one would have thought that the growing backlog of cases and the need to address the slothfulness in dispensing justice at the levels of the Magistracy and the High Courts would have forced both parties to reach a compromise and embolden efforts to arrive at a “consensus candidate’, this did not happen. Not even the need to implement and pilot more modern and realistic reforms, which could have seen massive improvements in the way justice is administered in Guyana, served as a compelling force that was powerful enough to encourage President Donald Ramotar and then Opposition Leader, Granger, to do what was legally required to end the impasse and delay in appointing the substantive office holders.
As guards changed, two more suitably qualified Judges were appointed to act as the Chancellor and CJ. This time, they were women of great distinction in the persons of Justices Roxanne George-Wiltshire and Yonette Cummings-Edwards. As history would have it, neither of the two was selected by the Presidential panel to be confirmed in their respective posts, following what was described as a long and arduous advertisement, interviewing and shortlisting process.
In the end, Justice Kenneth Benjamin emerged as the top person recommended by the panel, and has now been proposed by the President for appointment, while Justice Cummings-Edwards is being proposed for appointment as the new CJ. While no credible concerns have been raised about Justice Cummings-Edwards’s track record, a lot is being reported by sections of the media about Justice Benjamin’s history as far as delivering timely judgments is concerned. It is therefore important that Opposition Leader Jagdeo be given all of the requisite reports and information that led to the President’s selection of Justice Benjamin. Jagdeo must meet the nominee along with those who recommended him if he has doubts about Benjamin’s suitability for the job. The Opposition Leader must question the advertisement process and the President’s decision not to propose Justice George-Wiltshire for confirmation despite her sterling performance.
Also, Jagdeo must not turn a blind eye to other suitably qualified legal luminaries in the country, who can function in both posts. There must be no haste and no rush if the consultations are to be truly meaningful within the context of the Constitution. Any fallout or non-agreement can see the appointments being further delayed despite the frank and factual criticisms of no less a person than the President of the Caribbean Court of Justice, Sir Dennis Bryon.
President Granger must do all that is necessary to seal the deal and have substantive appointments made. He must go with what is specifically spelt out in the Constitution if he wants to demonstrate a true commitment to restoring the total independence and effectiveness of the Judiciary which dispenses justice here. Partisan politics could lose this time round in order for Guyana’s interests to win.
Even if the first meeting, based upon the statements released by both parties, was conducted in an atmosphere of mutual respect and civility, ‘justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done’.
