Dear Editor,
“Our Caribbean history is replete with examples of persons in high office who have sacrificed their otherwise good reputation… rather than accept that their judgement was faulty, their findings askew.
They seem to see it as a show of strength to remain stubborn and resolute in the face of strong public dissent and popular sentiment which runs contrary to their views on a particular matter.”
The above quotation was taken from an article which appeared in the Barbados Advocate of February 11, 2005 under the caption ‘Beyond mind of simple man.’
I find it necessary to recall those remarks in reference to the position occupied by Mr Vishnu Bisram as regards Guyana’s independent and republican status along with our political and economic development.
In his criticism of Ms Dawn Holder in a letter captioned ‘What were the reasons for breaking with England and the Privy Council?’ (SN 22.11.08) he asked nine questions and then surmised that there is need for a serious probing study to determine the real reason for Guyana breaking with the Privy Council.
There can be no doubt that Mr Bisram is very passionate and firm in his stance against the Caribbean Court of Justice, and while Ms Holder and Mr Robin Williams have adequately addressed most of his misconceptions and confusion I wish only to add a few comments.
First, in an effort to illustrate the inferiority of the Caribbean courts, Bisram urges readers to look at the many decisions of the Caribbean courts, which have been overturned by the Privy Council in recent years. Be that as it may, the fact of the matter is that the Privy Council would have overturned also, many decisions of the lower English courts. Further, I am not sure that the CCJ would not have arrived at the same conclusions as the Privy Council did.
Secondly, in many instances the Privy Council has upheld the decisions of our lower courts and on some occasions has referred certain aspects of certain cases to the regional courts for determination. This certainly speaks of the recognition which the Privy Council has given to our courts. With respect to the competence of our courts, I would respectfully direct Bisram’s attention to the judgment of the Privy Council delivered by the Law Lords on December 8, 2008 in the case of Felix Augustus Durity v AG of T&T. There he will find that the judgment of the lower court was upheld. Further I say not on that point.
With respect to Bisram’s findings that “an overwhelming majority of Guyanese [who lived during colonial rule] said life was much better under the British,” I would have serious difficulty with its accuracy. He said those were his findings from a recent study he did where he polled 1400 respondents whom he intercepted at random throughout the country. They indicated, “They were better off under colonial rule and wanted to return to the PC as the final court of appeal.”
For such findings to be valid, the overwhelming majority of the respondents would have to be no less than 55 years old with some knowledge and experience of colonial living standards including the workings of the Privy Council. I doubt whether in 2007 (the year of his study) the majority of adults in Guyana were 55 years old. They had to be much younger and that is why I question his findings.
I doubt whether any right-thinking Guyanese would want to return to colonial rule. Indeed! We may have difficulty with the management of our affairs and while our courts may not be functioning at full capacity and most efficiently, that is insufficient reason for wanting to surrender one’s sovereignty.
Yours faithfully,
Francis Carryl
