Dear Editor,
Guyana’s constitutional imbroglio and political stutter have now been laid bare by the belated public intervention of its international partners. Better late than never is a common refrain of those affected directly but were not in a position to challenge, meaningfully, those egregious violators of the Rule of Law.
Democratic Rule as a standard in any Republic, must never be allowed to be measured by the length of the President’s foot but by the breadth of his comprehension in matters of Governance. Propaganda aside, political leaders must act within the Constitution first and foremost and be guided by the Rule of Law in its objective sense. Where subjective actions do not strictly align themselves with national, objective conduct they, to that extent, are rendered illegitimate, unlawful and in violation of the Constitution, i.e., that tablet on which is engraved the civic and legal injunctions intended to restrict actions likely to be offensive to the common good of people. It is that framework of legality that permits an orderly embrace of competing forces for the transition from a state of Hobbesian disorder to Platonian democracy. Woodrow Wilson in his visionary contribution to democracy in the early 20th Century for self-determination of States did not rule out intervention in aid of its objective achievement.
While some of his more recent successors-in-office may have overstepped this laudable percept in their zeal to police the Globe its fundamental vision remains an attractive end. It is the means that may be offensive.
Closer to home, the record, since 2015, reflects a consistent disregard for the Constitution,
Orders of Court, parliamentary practices, implementation of the regime’s policy of cohesion, (which has virtually rewritten the Oxford Dictionary meaning of the word) and lack of conventional financial accountability are only a few of the missteps which objectively warrant local and international dissonance, even public dissent and disapprobation. Superior State power must rarely be the means to an end.
Democratic norms are the expectations enshrined in the Constitution which is the fons et origo of Executive creation and function, of which periodic Elections are constitutionally institutionalized. In much the same way that President Reagan described the Sandinista leader, Daniel Ortega, as a totalitarian in sunglasses the Guyanese public may be forgiven for concluding that Granger is a military autocrat dressed in western-woven business garments. As a historian, this Guyanese former military leader must be familiar with Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus of Roman heritage, (280BC-203BC). Given the sobriquet, the Cunctator, for his military manoeuvres which led to the defeat of Hannibal, the Carthaginian General, in the 2nd Punic War, his delaying tactics seem to have been mimicked by his Guyanese incarnation. It is not surprising that in less than 4 years (2015-2O18) this man has demonstrated his true stripes!
Based upon the empirical evidence above and given his track record of obdurate conduct,
Granger has become a constitutional recidivist. Even Sukarno’s “guided democracy” pales insignificantly when compared with the former’s authoritarian demonstration of unconstitutional whims and fancies.
Yours faithfully,
Justice Charles R. Ramson SC
Former Attorney General
and Minister of Legal Affairs
