Return to rational thinking and respect for rule of law

Dear Editor,
Let’s play a game. I did not invent it but the parameters and rules have been set by Guyana’s Court of Appeal (2-1). In this game, players add a single word to an Article of the Constitution then make an argument that this is what the framers intended. It seems a simple and innocuous enough premise and should the recent addition of “absolute” be upheld by the Caribbean Court of Justice, we can expect decades of fun and fees for the legal luminaries in the jurisdictions that subscribe to that court.
I will take the liberty of going first, as is the prerogative of anyone who frames rules for games;
Article 106 (7), notwithstanding its defeat, the Government shall remain in office and hold an elections within three months or such longer period as GECOM or the National Assembly shall by resolution supported by two-thirds of the votes of all elected members of the National Assembly determine and shall resign after the President takes the oath of office after the election
Editor, I expect that change is what President Granger wants and no doubt a Medal of Service will be due my way (I am ineligible for Silk). In fact, I quite expect David Granger to be the ‘man to beat’ at this game, for he has been playing it quite effectively for some time on his own; Granger’s masterpiece in altering Article 161 (2) by addition of
“…provided that if the Leader of the Opposition submits or fails to submit a list as provided for, the President shall appoint a person who holds or has held office as a Judge or …”
Editor, now that the Court of Appeal let us know the game exists and is viable, I look forward to a future of great uncertainty and never-ending chaos as we play ‘Words with Granger’, to the detriment of the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. I would much rather be playing ‘democracy’ and a return to rational thinking and respect for the rule of law.

Robin Singh