Dear Editor,
The Guyana Constitution must be given a chance to work. The on-going discussion on its relevance and application must be encouraged. For such allows the ventilation of diverse views in efforts to seek understanding and establish a political system the citizenry can be subject to.
Article 119 (A) of the Constitution expressly states- “(1) The National Assembly shall establish a Parliamentary Standing Committee for Constitutional Reform for the purpose of continually reviewing the effectiveness of the working of the Constitution and making periodic reports thereon to the Assembly, with proposals for reform as necessary.
(2) To assist in its work, the committee shall have power to co-opt experts or enlist the aid of other persons of appropriate expertise, whether or not such experts or other persons are members of the Assembly.”
In the 8th and 9th Parliament this Committee was chaired by the PPP. In the 10th Parliament it is headed by David Granger, Leader of the Opposition. While commentators and politicians are articulating the view that constitutional changes must be addressed, at the same time not one recommendation has been put forward by the Committee for at least the last decade. Neither has this nation seen any activity that informs us that those who were and are tasked with the responsibility for leading the way have responded in a constructive manner to the calls made over the years.
It is obvious that the Committee has the latitude to engage the citizenry throughout the length and breadth of this country, soliciting their ideas and working to strengthen this supreme instrument. What is obvious here is that the constitution has not failed the society; it is the persons tasked with the responsibility under the constitution that have not delivered the appropriate leadership.
This constitution at Title 1 guarantees the “Protection of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms of the Individual.” This protection is consistent with United Nations Declarations. Out of recognition for this vital aspect of man’s development and peaceful co-existence the society needs to be advised whether the present disregard for Title 1 means it ought to be excised in constitutional change, or, if not, why isn’t the current political leadership being held accountable for respecting us. Constitutional condemnation may be politically expedient but the society stands a better chance for immediate benefits from constitutional respect.
It is known that constitutional violation occurs on both sides of the House. And this will continue so long as we are prepared to cherry pick issues rather than holding every elected official accountable. The call for change becomes meaningless without the call for elected officials respecting the constitution. The demand for change must start with us demanding of them to comply with this instrument. We continue to witness political leaders who are also not prepared to respect the rules in their own party in the conduct of their day-to-day activities.
This country is at a dangerous crossroad where might is replacing right, where the rule of lawlessness is replacing the rule of law. Laws, rules and citizens are violated with impunity yet some would like it to be believed that respect will be achieved when there is executive power sharing. In our present state it would be in order to be sceptical that things will get better with constitutional change, when there is flagrant violation for what currently exists and persons are not prepared to hold the violators accountable.
Executive power-sharing, shared governance, government of national unity, or whatever it is called must be discussed and grounded by strong philosophical underpinning, guided by universally accepted principles to ensure what we seek is not tyranny of the majority or minority. Today we have an executive without the parliamentary majority yet this branch of government continues to disrespect the decisions of the legislature and refuses to acknowledge the people’s will or interests. If in the present circumstance a minority government is not held accountable what assurances do we have that when all the parties are in the executive there will not be the deepening of violations?
The youths of today are called upon to immerse themselves in the discussion to determine the direction of this country. Some of my generation hold the view that marginalisation is a result of being excluded from the executive. It is a view that awaits supporting evidence that an amalgamated executive structure can guarantee respect for every group or individual, whether in the minority or the majority. The Constitution protects every group and individual regardless of political affiliation, race, class, sex, creed, being in the opposition or government, but this instrument continues to be disregarded.
If the major leaders in the present political class have no respect for Rights and the Rule of Law, no power sharing, shared governance or government of national unity would change their contempt for citizens and the nation’s institutional structures. It is a contempt that is seeping down and engulfing the wider society. Politics is about people and their development. Politics is not about violating laws/rules and transgressing rights.
Yours faithfully,
Lincoln Lewis
