Self-evaluation
The specific ‘no objection’ role that cabinet plays currently has to do with evaluating how well and fair the procurement process itself has been working. From a reading of Article 54 (1) of the Procurement Act 2003 available online, this specific oversight role of cabinet, “… to review all procurements …” apparently was derived from the absence of the Public Procurement Commission (PPC). Since cabinet is part of the executive which has responsibility for public procurement, cabinet, in effect, is undertaking an evaluation of itself. Persons are deliberately conflating this inappropriate role for cabinet with its right to reject a decision of an evaluation committee with which it does not concur. Given that it enjoys and retains the implied right of ‘no objection’ under Article 39 (3) of the Procurement Act 2003, one must enquire as to the reason cabinet is seeking a ‘no objection’ role as part of the work of the PPC.
This article argues that cabinet should not be allowed to insert itself into the intended independent review into the functioning of the procurement system that is the constitutional prerogative of the PPC. It also posits that Article 39 (3) of the Procurement Act 2003 should be amended to give cabinet the express right to a ‘no objection’ role if it feels that that role is not already available to it by virtue of the authority and control it has over the procuring entities. In which case, Article 54 should also be amended to make it clear that neither cabinet nor any part of the executive would be part of the independent review mechanism that is the PPC.
Not trivial
The matter of the ‘no objection’ role of cabinet is not a trivial one that was the consequence of an oversight or bad legislative drafting that some would like Guyanese to believe. This issue is at the heart of whether or not Guyana could ever practise “good government” as desired by Article 65 (1) of the Constitution, and that would allow parliament the space to