Dear Editor,
One good thing that will come as a result of the confidence vote is the Court’s ruling on Article 155(1)(a) which addresses dual citizens sitting in the National Assembly. This article expressly states, “No person shall be qualified for election as a member of the National Assembly who is, by virtue of his own act, under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power or state.” This article was inserted in the Constitution of Guyana as a result of the Constitutional Reform process of 1999-2000.
For quite some time yours truly, the media and others have been addressing the issue of non-compliance with the article, and society was getting the royal runaround, finger pointing, excuses and denial from the politicians, when culpability exists on both sides of the political divide. Lawmakers (Parliamentarians), including the President who assents to Bills passed by the National Assembly, have the greatest obligation to this nation and its citizens to uphold the Bills they passed, laws assented to, and oaths taken to obey the laws. Laws cannot be cherry-picked, they have to be upheld in their entirety, and disservice is being done to the nation and citizenry when the principal custodians abrogate this duty and responsibility.
Imbalance in political attention and admittance does more harm than good for the society because the Rule of Law is supreme and universal. It is an incomplete account of the violation on both sides as reflected in the Stabroek News’ report `Harmon’s dual citizenship underlines gov’t hypocrisy- Nandlall’ (14th January 2019). Our journalists should not allow themselves to be preyed on to carry a one-sided story, when it is crucial to the nation at this time and, particularly when we are navigating a matter of national import involving both sides. And as matter of fact the PPP/C government would have been culpable of violating this article before the coming of Minister Joe Harmon to the National Assembly.
When Anil Nandlall, former PPP/C Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, has taken the route to deceive he must be held to account. He should have admitted his political party is not an innocent bystander nor has it been advocate or enforcer of the extant article. Harmon has come clean, though belatedly, in his admittance. He should not have sat in the House with dual citizenship and must now do the honourable thing.
Nandlall is being deceptive in his claim that the extant article was probably there since independence and all political parties are in violation, which gives the impression that this violation has been happening for more than 50 years. Not true. The constitutional requirement came into effect in 2000. Since then successive PPP/C governments and the Coalition government have been in breach of it. Sitting in the Assembly on the Opposition side when the violation continues to occur, on either or both side(s), doesn’t exonerate the party or its Members.
What is being gleaned from Nandlall’s comment is that should the issue of dual citizenship be pursued it will create a serious constitutional crisis that can affect legislation passed during the Coalition and PPP/C governments. If this is how he feels or is thinking, the Court must be asked to adjudicate on this specific aspect, for his opinion is not that of the Court’s and should not be seen as definitive.
Let it be made very clear- we cannot have different standards for the legislators and that for the wider society. For instance, if a man is caught with two grammes of marijuana he will be placed before the court and face the full brunt of the law that deals with the violation of being in possession of this substance. Likewise, if the law states a person, based on constitutional description, cannot sit in the Assembly, he/she who violates same must face the requisite consequence. Society must remain vigilant and ensure the politicians do not now band together and move to invalidate the article because both sides have been found guilty.
This nation is facing a legislative crisis created by those in the National Assembly. When persons with dual citizenship finish milking Guyana and leave, they have recourse and the protection of their adopted country, while we at home have to live and deal with the consequences of their acts and decisions. You cannot serve two masters at the same time, which informed the spirit and intent of the citizenship article.
Aside from the issues surrounding Charrandass Persaud and the confidence vote, what cannot be denied is that his exit from this country came with the protection of his adopted country. And as he presently resides abroad in some degree of comfort, he has left in his wake a nation tense, further divided, as we seek to navigate the consequences of his action and hold the fabric of nationhood together.
The issue of dual citizenship has dire implications for the nation’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, respect for the Constitution and Laws in its entirety, citizens’ rights and freedoms, international terrorism, and the exploiting of our resources to the benefit of Guyana and for all Guyanese. In light of our territorial challenges, the potential wealth of oil and gas, what is to stop anyone of these persons ‘selling out,’ having the security and protection to leave. It is evident that many Guyanese can be easily bought given the corruption level in government and by public officials. Having only Guyanese citizenship means any untoward conduct, using the people’s power in the legislature or executive, the person is guaranteed the protection of local laws. This is not too much to ask or expect if one is offering him or herself for leadership at this level.
We are a small, venerable nation, awash with natural resources. Article 155 ‘Disqualifications for election as members,’ plays a pivotal role in safeguarding us, at the Executive and Legislative levels, from being exploited by foreign forces, whose desire to influence and mould our destiny have never been extinguished. History has shown such attempts were underpinned by a divide-and-rule policy that has rent us asunder and our collective well-being and development hindered for far too long. We must no longer trifle with this serious issue for such a policy continues to carry dire consequences for race, race relations, class and other diversity.
Article 155 is meant to prove and secure the highest form of legislated patriotism. It is not that persons of dual citizenship are not considered important or valued for their skills nor cannot serve Guyana at any other level or in any other form, but the Constitution stipulates restrictions to be elected and serve as President and parliamentarian. It augurs well to secure the integrity of nation-building and nationhood giving due respect.
The National Assembly has not been properly seated since 2000 when the provision was assented to. Seeking the Court’s intervention allows the nation to settle this matter once and for all.
Yours faithfully,
Lincoln Lewis
