Dear Editor,

I refer to a letter captioned ‘Overseas voting is a non-starter’ which was published in Stabroek News on March 8, and written by Dr Cheddi Jagan, Jr.

That person often defends his father in the press and I therefore see nothing wrong with now doing so in relation to my own father, even though I should be sensible enough to remember that politicians and their families should have thick skins whenever people write and say nonsense about them, either because they do not know better or cannot help themselves.

I have read what my father, Ralph Ramkarran, has written in the press about overseas voting. I think I understood it. While I am a lawyer, I do not believe that one has to be a lawyer to understand it. A little bit of intelligence and common sense will, I think, be enough.

What I understood my father to be saying is that the Constitution of Guyana gives the right to all Guyanese, wherever they live, to vote. I also read, and agreed with, his statement that any law which offends against the constitution is void and ought to be set aside by a court if it is called upon to make a decision. So, a law which limits registration to Guyanese residing in Guyana may well be held by a court to be void. This is all quite simple.

What I cannot understand is how, from this, one can come to the conclusion that my father is calling for the restoration of overseas voting. If someone looks at a donkey and says “that is a donkey,” I can see no justification for anyone saying to that person that he is expressing a desire for the thing pointed out to be a donkey. A donkey is a donkey. Simple. Just so, a constitutional right is a constitutional right whether we want it to be so or not.

Yours faithfully,
Kamal Ramkarran