Dear Editor,
Ms Dawn A Holder writes ‘Guyanese should be proud that they have broken the bondage of far distant powers’ (SN 21.11.08) meaning their complete break with Britain (including the Queen as constitutional head and an impartial judiciary).
In analyzing Ms Holder’s commentary, I suggest readers focus on the following questions: How did Guyana become a republic? Was it legitimately obtained? Did the people give their assent to the move executed by Forbes Burnham? What has life been like since becoming a republic 38 years ago? What progress has the nation made since independence (or attaining republican status)? What has been the state of the judiciary since independence or since the break from the Privy Council?
Was Burnham’s decision to break with the Privy Council legitimate? What were the real reasons for breaking with England or the Privy Council – was it to stop appeals challenging electoral fraud?
Was “Burnham really a thinking man” for ending judicial appeals to the independent Privy Council (which could not be manipulated) or was he a smart man as Dr Jagan once described him? One should not forget that Burnham rigged elections and then used his magic majority to usurp powers to make Guyana a republic and to break constitutional conventions. A serious probing study will provide the real reasons behind independence, republican status and the break with the Privy Council.
I also urge readers to look at the many decisions handed down by Caribbean courts that were overturned by the Privy Council on appeal over recent years. In light of this and other facts, we should not rebuke those governments or people who don’t want to switch to the CCJ as their final court of appeal. Some of the judges whose decisions were overturned by the Privy Council now sit on the CCJ.
Decisions handed down by Caribbean judges are often critiqued by the law lords and judges severely reprimanded.
With regard to how Guyanese feel about their break from Britain, I suggest Ms Holder go back to Guyana and ask them. In a recent study I did, an overwhelming majority of Guyanese (who lived during colonial rule) said life was much better under the British.
I don’t think they considered the monarchy “an outmoded and regressive institution that has no real relevance to Caribbean people.”
I should note that Britain would like to rid itself of the dependency of her remaining colonies – they are costly to maintain. But Bermuda and Anguilla, among others, don’t want to break away from England because they enjoy the benefits of being tied to England. They enjoy a high standard of living with a per capita income similar to that of America which is 30 times that of Guyana. Many Guyanese live in Bermuda and Anguilla and will not trade their colonial status to return to free republican Guyana.
So I am not sure the complete break with Britain was a blessing or a curse.
Yours faithfully,
Vishnu Bisram
After 28 years of the PNC and 16 years, Guyanese are no better off today than they were under British rule. And if Bisram’s assessment of Bermuda and Aguilla is correct, then the fact that Guyanese are running to live there is an indictment against our political leaders who run around beating their chests in self righteousness are absolute failures.
Can you imagine the President openly questioning judges’ rulings? Can you imagine the government trying to interfere with the duties of the Chancellor and Chief Justice? Can you imagine a Chief Magistrate being sent home for four years to be investigated for wrong doing? Can you imagine a sitting justice is also the head of the Judicial Service Commission?
The Privy Council was a bad idea decades ago, but what we now have is worse! We are now our own worse enemies, and with enemies like us who needs us as friends? No wonder we are running to countries that were once considered homes to our enemies. These people are probaly laughing their heads off!
Then, “God Bless America” for you and for me too – huh! ;-)
Hola Vishnu, i don’t understand……..Why don’t you go read a history book?…Oo not your area of expertise,i’m sorry i asked…..
In the beginning, Guyana becoming a Republic was much more symbolism than substance, because it was basically exchanging one demon for another. At the time, it appeared that dealing with our own demon might be much better than the dreaded and often inflexible British demon.
However, our immature judicial system quickly became highly politicize, where the simplest form of judicial recourse became an adventure into the political workings of the society. At first, this new behavior wasn’t necessary of Burnham’s doing, in fact, he merely capitalized on his growing larger than life image which everybody appear to readily idolized. This was the sign of the times, a blind venture into unknown territory and nobody wanted to rock the boat.
The PPP as the then political opposition was highly intimidated with these new developments of state and took a ring-side seat spectating Burnham’s sudden grandeur. Oh yes, the PPP was culpable here, because they were also mesmerized about the idea of Guyana becoming a Republic and didn’t want to be labeled the scrooge either.
Although I was a teenager at the time, I know of a judicial situation involving a case which might have been referred to the Privy council, where a local Judge phoned Congress Place to ask Burnham as to how he would handle that specific situation. It was this ‘not-knowing-what-to-do’, now that Guyana was a Republic behavior that Burnham capitalized on. Maybe because folks thought that he was more legally astute than everybody else and had all of the answers.
B.C.Pires once gave a satirical answer to your question and ending with words to this effect:
We had the Privy Council in England, now we have the privy coming down the street just outside the High Court. If you pass near GT court you will see the privy running down the street.
i would suggest mr. bisram also consider the judgments given by the Guyana Court of Appeal which have been used and or referred to in Privy Council decisions.
as well as the fact that the english courts are eager to get rid of the Privy Council as well.
returning to or lamenting over the Privy Council is no solution to the problems with the Judiciary
have you read these Privy Council decisions to decide whether they are worth following or praising so highly
Simple. Whitehall is as outdated as you can get. A better system would have been the American system.
Talking about wanting to walk backwards! What does it matter now anyway? And why is Bisram putting all of this on Burnham’s back. Give Cheddie is fair weight of the credit or blame, whichever–half of it!
Could this man ever write without showing his PPP stripes and just be a Guyanese for a change? He has turned a perfectly ligitimate question into politics as usual.
I am much too young to have to always tolerate this mess from older Guyanese and their baggage! It sucks!
Why the argument, Breaking with the privy Council, should be considered, a natural progression, post self Govt, and Nationhood, ….. the success or viability of such action like all the other consequences that followed Independence, depended on what replaced the institution, and more importantly who were going to be the decisionmakers……. unfortunately in our case and many other 3rd. world states….. Those that took over, were not up to the task….. .. + their lives were at the mercy of the new Political “Emperors”…. hence in my opinion There is nothing to be “proud or not Proud about”…. … Even in the USA today…. the final jUdicial body…. The Supreme Court……. decisions appear to be coloured by Its members Ideological, and even Political persuasions…..
I do agree with Bisram, however, that Burnhams rush to declare his independence from the Privy Council, had little to do re the pursuance of enhanced justice system for the Guyanese people. but more for the imposition of his unfettered authority…… the ensuing years of his rule confirms this…
Those who forget the past are bound to repeat it but those like you and Bisram are failing to smell the stench of the decay in your points of view. You political fossils are so fixated in the past, you fail to see our future, feel our optimism for our Guyana, voice the dream of unity.
Burnham/Jagan, who cares????!!!! They’re dead. Bury them already!
And Bisram, GuyFlag, the lot of you, if you need a train out of the age of the dinosaurs, take the 2008 train out of there. For you guys, it would be a long journey. Some of you may never get here!
Hoooray Gap1. Telll it like it is. Talk about brain dead people…Guyana is loaded with them..and daa spread all over de place too…..their brains died with Burnham and Jagan and since then they cannot think (I would like to say rationally but must instead say), at all. They only remember what happened 40 years ago but cannot focus on the atrocious situation that exists in Guyana today nor visualize what could be a glorious future if the country had the capable rulers. Guyana is still losing the battle to come into the 21st century.