The President – and those who would be

– some selective National Awards

Hello. Regard today’s offerings as Fenty’s Ramblings on local politics, now becoming less and less of my preference. But here goes (as I quote one period).

Our Revised Constitution, amended by wiser heads and minds six years ago, under a title and the articles 89 to 98 and various others, is replete with such guidance regarding the establishment of the Office of the President, the qualifications for the election as president; the grounds for removal of the incumbent and other relevancies including remuneration. (We know today that the latter consideration has been just amended to reflect unprecedented benefits for our late-forties, young president when he demits the presidency in 2011 – and for all others to be in that position. If some non-PPP party and administration do not amend the legislation; if and when they ever accede to government. (Reflect on political “human” nature, OK?).

The Constitution – a national birth certificate and lasting Executive Order, of sorts – advises us, among other provisions, that our president is “the Head of State, the Supreme Executive Authority and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Republic”. It spells out “grounds” for removing the President from office, such as his becoming “physically or mentally incapable of discharging the functions of his Office” or “if he commits any violation of this constitution or any gross misconduct”. But a perusal of the Articles (179-180) which describe the procedures for removal reveals why these removals, in the Guyanese context, are really theory! Beyond any Constitution, we must realize that because of both systems and available quality, our choices of a leader can be so limited. Is our own President a well-rounded person? Music? Fine Arts? Multi-cultural? Wide interests–or just political? How much has his age allowed him to be? Who really advises him, knowing he takes that counsel? To be a warm sincere person!?

Fitzpatrick’s President

Before I paraphrase Miles Fitzpatrick on today’s president and presidency, join me in consideration of persons who were and who aspire to be our Head of State.

For me Cheddi Jagan was the most sincere politician who aspired to be and became President. After studies in the 1940s USA, observing class structure and living its consequences, after studying Socialist/Communist manifestoes and dogma and, no doubt, after being influenced by his wedded political soul mate, Cheddi Jagan made his professional dentistry a hobby in preference to the politics he pursued, on behalf of the working-class, in and out of Parliament from the mid-forties. Forget his ideology for a while. Here was Guyana’s consummate, quintessential political “animal” who truly had people’s interest in mind.

I posit that his nemesis, Forbes Burnham, though wily, ambitious, manipulative but brilliant, also was motivated by service to (his) people, Alas, he “enjoyed” power more than Cheddi cared to. And perhaps was undone by it. I care not, here, to assess Arthur Chung, Sam Hinds, Desmond Hoyte or Janet Jagan. You, dear reader, may do so. Whatever the constitution intended, whatever is expected by the people who eventually elected the young PPP Turk from the East Coast village, Bharrat Jagdeo has proven himself to be a phenomenon of sorts. Handpicked by the Jagans over other longer-serving PPP loyalists, the young Russian-trained Economist has become many things to many people. Without a full-length profile and analysis, let me summarise that I feel, Frankly Speaking, that President Jagdeo has assumed – and almost perfected – some

Burnhamesque,

Burnhamite, Burnhamistic”

behaviours.

Okay! Of course I’m not daring to compare him with Forbes Burnham’s vision academic stature, intellectual capacity, political acumen or Machiavellian state craft or statesmanship (?). But examine the tendencies! Removal of Army Officers, RE-instatement, over executive decisions, of those in his favour; nepotism involving party loyalists and extended familial connections dealings with trade unions, knowledge of legal procedures before the judiciary’s Special Prosecutors, etc. etc. etc. To me? Pure Burnham. But isn’t there something to admire here. Last Sunday, a very knowledgeable, one-time insider, Miles Fitzpatrick, publicly alluded to how Bharrat is executing his presidency. Miles implied that young Jagdeo has but his own (Burhamesque spin on the title, “Supreme Executive Authority” Jagdeo overrides his cabinets collective from time to time; he obviously occasionally “humours” his party’s Central Committee; he micro-manages certain Ministries and national projects; he appoints, disappoints and advises commissions and corporations, behind closed doors. I enjoyed Miles Fitzpatrick on that Spotlight programme, usually carried by the Hoyte/Blackman’s TV Station! What think you?

Corbin – and who else – for President!?

One aspect of PNC Leader Robert Corbin’s current health issue is this: will he be healthy and robust enough to withstand the rigours of the presidency if he ever wins it? Remember now, he is still PNC leader.

You must look all the current and emerging contenders and pretenders in the eyes and ask yourself these questions, among others: Why does he want to be President? Does he want to be my President – and of all Guyana? What are his qualifications, experience and ambitions? What ten things will improve his own life as President, that he will improve his own life as President, that he does not now possess? What motivated you to want to lead a country?

Listen now to the explanations, interpretations and “analyses” of people like Alexander, Van-West Charles, Mc David, Norton, (Lowe), Armstrong, Ainsworth and other PNC-ties. Must I take Van West seriously when he suggests that many PNC wrongs were committed—over long sustained, periods – by spontaneous actions of activists, without the knowledge or sanction of his party’s hierarchy? (Just one of his recent “submissions”).

So start listening out for them – all of them: Robert Persaud, Nagamootoo, Ramotar (seriously?), Benn, Trotman, Ramjattan, Dev, Sharma (!?!), et al.

National Awards? For Whom?

This Monday evening – pre-Independence Anniversary Night – I reflected on the Republic’s National Awards.

I recalled my private admiration for Cheddi and Eusi Kwayana who made it known that they would never accept any of the nation’s awards from a government they considered illegitimate and a travesty against the national will.

I used to think up excuses for accepting if I were offered. Unfortunately/fortunately, I was never even considered, though persons were awarded – repeatedly. I remember too how the PPP folks awarded their folks in the nineties. So, whatever happened to our national awards?

I’d like to see our non-political, civic-professional citizens who served, selflessly, being given national recognition – and its few benefits – 30 or 40 of them, if only every two years. Today, only one or two, specially anointed, are selectively awarded. Shame!! (No need to ever consider me!).

Ponder…

*1) The Fidelity importers corrupt-practices case is causing a certain amount of national unease. Ask Mr Sattaur!

*2) Can we dare to excuse the loss of the EU Sugar money?

*3) $305,000 bail for forging tint certificates! You ever know that the Home Affairs Ministry issued them?

*4) After nearly five years the New Amsterdam Town Council is to get an excavator again. Spare parts “took some time”. Independence progress!

*5) Look out for the grand 2011 political coalition!

‘Til Next Week!

Comments?

allanafenty@yahoo.com