Aslew of activities by the PNC-led Government of our country following the last general elections raises the question once again as to what are principles by which we shall be governed? We had assumed that the question had long been settled: the overriding principle would be the Rule of Law – the notion that we would be governed by laws and not by men.
While we may have had many problems with colonial rule, we assumed unanimity in our acceptance on the Rule of Law. But we may be too optimistic. Take the instance in the public domain right now: the claim by the Government that the lease the prior government issued to the Cheddi Jagan Research Centre (CJRC) is fatally defective on several legal grounds it enumerated. The CJRC, on the other hand, has rejected that claim and countered with contra legal citations. Under the principle of the Rule of Law, the Government should have moved to the courts rather than sending workers from the Ministry of the Presidency to change locks. In the courts, the dispute would be considered under the ambit of the laws of the land and under the principle of equity and a judgement would be handed down.
But instead, there’re all kinds of inflammatory statements issued, protest marches staged and ultimatums launched. And all of this from the Executive that is in charge of the State. It is no wonder we have remained lumped as “Third World” and by definition, “Third Rate”. We in Guyana want to live like the “developed” countries; we demand the trappings and titles of the “First World” – but we do not have the fortitude to stand on the bedrock that has made those countries into havens of stability – the Rule of Law.
What is this Rule of Law and in what way is it being transgressed today? In modern parlance, the essential characteristic of the Rule of Law is: the supremacy of law, which means that all persons (individuals and institutions) are subject to law; a concept of justice which emphasises interpersonal adjudication, law based on standards and the importance of procedures; restrictions on the exercise of discretionary power; the doctrine of judicial precedent; the common law methodology; legislation should be prospective and not retrospective; an independent judiciary; the exercise by Parliament of the legislative power and restrictions on exercise of legislative power by the Executive and last, but not least, an underlying moral basis for all law.
In the matter that is roiling the nation, let us consider the element of the Rule of Law in our parliamentary system. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and even the Judiciary, Executive and the Legislature must operate within its strictures. In Guyana, however, there is a stubborn streak inherited from the departed colonial power of the Executive holding itself above the law – and therefore the Constitution.
What is playing out in Guyana is the insistence of the Executive to pursue its own notion of “justice” by bypassing the recourse to adjudication by the courts. In pursuing this misguided course, it risks bringing down the whole edifice of the Rule of Law so painstakingly won in the last two centuries following the abolition of slavery.
This challenge to the Rule of Law illustrates the stubborn refusal by the Executive to accept that justice requires that the better interest should prevail but that does not mean that there is no merit in the inferior interest. There is merit (and possibly demerit) on both sides. Whether there may be flaws or not in the lease for Red House, for instance, surely the Executive would not deny that the CJRC has some rights to secure the papers of a former president of the republic. They have to leave it to the courts to ascertain which side has the better right.
The elements in the Government’s counter protests refused to accept there might be other interests existing much less “better interests”.
