Dear Editor,
In light of the Court of Appeal Ruling, please permit me a few lines to share the following opinions.
On December 21, 2018, a no-confidence motion was passed.
The Government did not respect nor accept it. It was business as usual citing an appeal to the Speaker.
An appeal to the Speaker ensued and the Speaker upheld the NCM.
The Government did not respect nor accept it. It was business as usual citing an appeal to the courts.
In her ruling, the Chief Justice on January 31 upheld the NCM.
The Government did not respect nor accept it. It was business as usual citing an appeal to the Court of Appeal.
Court of Appeal overturns the Speaker’s and High court’s decision. The Government accepted it and it is business as usual. “We are free to carry on without due regard to the appeals pending at the CCJ.”
By logical deduction, it can be considered conclusive that the Government only respects rulings that are in their favour.
To convene parliament in light of the pending appeal at the CCJ would create yet another precedent in the history and political landscape of Guyana as the matter is not considered laid to rest until the final ruling is handed down by the CCJ.
I would humbly venture a guess that the CCJ would uphold the Appellate Court’s decision on arguments that were placed in the public domain on Dr. Alexis’ presence in the matter by Mr. Datadin. Unfor-tunately that conflict of interest is not even a consideration in these matters which further serves to undermine what a democratic and fair process ought to be. But the big question is, in the event the CCJ upholds the NCM, and I do believe it is a long shot at this point, would the Government respect the Court’s decision?
We know that despite Court rulings,.. much like the Chief Justice’s, the Government can choose to simply ignore a ruling as the Belizean government did to the Mayas in their landmark case at the CCJ. Can Governments choose to ignore rulings? Well, simply put, the resounding answer is yes.
I would suggest that the CCJ’s very relevance to Guyana becomes a question with this case and may mark a reconsideration of the Privy Council as our final court.
I am no legal mind, however I have always maintained that Article 106(7) does not contemplate judicial review as the courts cannot pronounce on the Article in 90 days given the time to navigate the three courts. However, it is a matter that needs to be laid to rest and there is no more an opportune time than now.
That lays us at the foot of GECOM. GECOM, one of our instruments that is by a great extent, one of the arms meant to support and protect our democracy has done anything but. They have been instrumental in obstructing the very essence of a NCM and Article 106(7). GECOM has shown their hand and the times ahead could be troubling if the CCJ upholds the NCM. Article 106(7) mandates that GECOM has to be election ready in 90 days regardless of ANY list.
I would say that we as a nation need to look at a reformulation of GECOM under any new administration with a great degree of urgency to remove the political claws from the institution.
What I also feel very obligated to mention is the polarizing effect that these issues have had on our nation. In the last three months, we have seen a vast majority of our population move back into their divisive camps. Instead of trying to defuse the rhetoric, both politicians and populace have simply resorted to defending fairly nonsensical positions reminiscent of the PPP trying to defend DEVIDE v Divide.
It would also be remiss of me if I did not mention the profound silence by Dr Hinds on these issues that fall clearly under his remit as a commentator. How can such a staunch political scientist have grown so silent since December 21, 2018?
LJP, ANUG and FED-UP were formed to address a nation that seems listless at sea.
If one dares to ask the question of our President’s health, “How dare thee?” If one dares to ask of Mr Ali’s certification, “How dare thee?”
We have cultivated an environment whose current crop is the death of objective and reasoned disagreements. A place where political victimization gives rise to political cowards.
Free speech is no longer a constitutional right. It is in the crosshairs of public assault and assassination. There are those who have openly threatened others without consequence by the Law Enforcement officials. Others engage in outright divisive, emotional, illogical, and racist rants yet expect us to all ‘live in peace, tolerance and harmony.’ What these upcoming elections offer, whenever they come, are great challenges, but also in great challenges, there are great opportunities.
In these times, it is important to take stock of how far we have NOT come in 53 years.
The governing party continues to use state funds to campaign just as the PPP did. They continue to have no regard for the law as is evident by their commitment to have Dual Citizens continue to sit in Parliament despite the CJ’s Ruling on the matter. Accountability is not a convenient trick. It requires us to think of our children’s future.
All Guyanese who are concerned for the future of this beautiful country should take the time to engage in all sorts of uncomfortable discussions and keep their emotions in check. Learn to be objective and remove the political lens from every discussion. Take a long and hard look at what free speech as enshrined in the constitution really is and endeavour to engage. Take time to consider that accountability is not a one off trick that only applies when your preferred government is out of office, or we can collectively say we are engaged in a race to the bottom.
Our foreparents sacrificed a significant lot to give us these precious gifts. Let’s not waste them!
Yours faithfully,
Lenox Shuman
