Dear Editor,
Dr Henry Jeffrey is right in his argument that “Majority rule is acceptable to no one” (SN, February 13). I am in total agreement with the good doctor, but how do we get a form of government that is acceptable to everyone, and truly representative of all the ethnic groups.
Like Dr Jeffrey, Mr Carl Greenidge, in an earlier letter in SN (Feb 3), also bemoaned the PNC/Burnham constitution saying it is unworkable and unacceptable and feels the PPP should have included PNCites and AFCites in its government. But the AFC had made its intention known that it does not want to be a part of any administration. Both gentlemen are advocating some kind of shared governance that would be truly representative of the spokesperson (or leadership) of the various ethnic groups. I support that position. Ethnic tokenism as practised by the PNC and PPP cannot work. Genuine representatives of the ethnic groups must be part of governing.
The fact is the Burnham constitution does not allow for shared governance and the PPP is using the PNC-imposed constitution to teach the PNC a lesson for its years of excluding the PPP from office through electoral fraud.
In calling for shared governance, both gentlemen seem to forget that they were part and parcel (if not advocates) of the present Burnham/PNC constitution. They never opposed it when they were lieutenants of Burnham and when the PNC was in office illegally through fraudulent elections. They never owned up to their mistakes. They enjoyed the perks of office while others suffered. They have found fault with the constitution after they are out of government. In addition, when Dr Jeffrey was with the PPP as a minister, he did not see a need to rid the country of that farce.
The PNC imposed constitution was a fraud foisted on the nation against the wishes of the PPP and other opposition parties. Some 90% of the nation opposed the constitution and boycotted the referendum.
Now enjoying power under the PNC-imposed constitution, the PPP does not want to give it up. No government in its right mind would engineer itself out of office. If the PPP were to be out of office after the next election, and that possibility is very likely given that the PPP continues to alienate its own supporters, I am certain the PPP will call for shared governance just as the PNC is doing today.
A way has to be found to rid the country of the Burnham constitution so there can be inclusive government and good governance. One ethnic group should not be able to dominate the country or the government. Under the British constitution, there was a kind of shared governance – a coalition government. Then Burnham rigged the election and jettisoned the PNC’s junior partner, the United Force. Under the Burnham constitution, PNC majority party (minority race) rule was not an issue. If we had the 1966 constitution today, there would have been a coalition government or shared governance.
What prevents Mr Greenidge or Dr Jeffrey advocating the abrogation of this PNC constitution that was forced onto the population and return us back to a democratic constitution? What prevents these gentlemen from demanding the restoration of the independence constitution? What prevents either one from going to court and challenging the legality of the Burnham constitution?
The people have tasted the Burnham constitution and the independence constitution and even the 1961 constitution prepared by the great Dr Fenton Ramsahoye and others. The 1961 constitution was amended to produce the 1966 constitution. Guyana and Guyanese experienced the truly democratic dynamics of good government and governance between 1957 and 1964. The contents of the 1961 internal self-government and the 1966 Independence constitutions should be revisited and sensibly blended to give us a workable constitution that prevents one ethnic group from running the affairs of the country. Cheddi Jagan, Forbes Burnham, Jai Narine Singh, Balram Singh Rai and Rahaman Gajraj prepared the way at the 1960 Constitutional Conference. Fenton Ramsahoye had drafted an independence constitution that Burnham derided as a “gasoline constitution” for the country. Fenton Ramsahoye’s well-crafted draft may be an excellent source document. It was prepared in the Attorney General’s Chambers that had very brilliant legal minds and in parliament at a period that can be referred to as the golden years in our country when compared to what transpired after independence.
Why don’t the politicians come up with an agreement to allow the population to choose which constitution they prefer – among the ones we experienced, and perhaps add new choices prepared by the AFC and PPP, and even another one from the PNC. The people should be consulted on how they should be governed. No politician or party has a right to foist a constitution on a population. And no, there should not be one-race rule.
Yours faithfully,
Vishnu Bisram