Dear Editor,
The Guyana Constitution, familiarly known as the Burnham Constitution, is flawed. It has always been flawed. The person who was the first to benefit from its enactment, constructed the constitution so he could benefit from its flaws. Even after the amendments to 2003, it still remains flawed. The sad reality is that the constitution is flawed to the detriment of the progress and development of Guyana. The constitution is so flawed that all oppositions over the last 30 or so years had problems with how the respective governments applied it.
President Cheddi Jagan had a problem with the Guyana Constitution. President Desmond Hoyte had a problem with the Guyana Constitution. The APNU and AFC leaders, while in opposition, had a problem with the Guyana Constitution. To avoid an embarrassing no confidence motion against him, President Ramotar prorogued the parliament.
The Guyana Constitution is so flawed that the APNU+AFC coalition while in opposition and on the campaign trail, promised the nation faithfully, that if the people elected them in their first 100 days, they would reform the flawed constitution. Now it is looking like this will be another unfulfilled coalition promise. It was published that President Granger is refusing to give a timeline for the promised constitutional reform. This is sad. In what appears to be a shifting of the goalpost, the President is saying that he needs to see some national discourse on the proposed amendments.
Editor, that sounds plausible; however, it seems like an attempt to further delay the much needed constitutional reform. If the President cannot, or will not, give a timeline for constitutional reform, then he should at the least, give a timeline for the beginning of the public discourse he claims he needs to see. For the President to simply tell the country that he needs public discourse on the matter, yet not to say who will be responsible for organizing that discourse, or when they will begin, is really unacceptable.
Editor, there is a current discourse going on in relation to the amendment of Juvenile Justice Bill. Given my knowledge in this field, a draft copy of the bill was sent to me by the Public Security Ministry. I made my input for additions and deletions. A few weeks ago several stakeholders were summoned to the Pegasus Hotel for a public discourse on the bill. If the President wishes to have public discourse on amending the constitution there needs to be a similar template. A draft document of the proposed amendments that Mr Nigel Hughes submitted to the President needs to be sent to stakeholders, or otherwise published. Some structured group needs to be assigned to organizing the public discourse across the country. And a timeline, both for the commencement of the public discourse and the compilation of the findings, needs to be established. Aside from these deliberate structures, reform to the flawed Guyana Constitution will never see the light of day.
Editor, please allow me to end by saying that it is very disheartening how some politicians become so flippant about the promises they make in desperate times.
Yours faithfully,
Pastor Wendell Jeffrey
