Dear Editor,

With regards to President David Granger unilaterally selecting Justice (rtd) James Patterson as GECOM Chairman without furnishing reasons for rejecting three lists submitted by Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo, questions need to be asked as to what criteria did President David Granger use in rejecting the three lists? Without furnishing reason/s for rejecting the lists how is anyone going to be able to know whether the President acted rationally or irrationally?

The whole point of the Amendment (Article 161) from what existed before was to prevent the President from unilaterally selecting a GECOM Chairman which the President has done anyway. What would be the point of the Amendment other than for decorative purposes?

Yours faithfully

Sean Ori

Around the Web