Dear Editor,
Politicians make promises that they hardly keep; that is the essence of politics. Politicians must never be trusted regardless of party affiliation; they are all made of essentially the same cloth, regardless of party. People must demand they carry out their promises, especially on constitutional reforms.
During the election campaign, with much fanfare the APNU+AFC politicians committed to constitutional reform. The coalition announced constitutional reform as its first order of business as well as a date for local government elections if elected. It promised to put together an independent constitutional commission (headed by a senior lawyer not affiliated with the two parties and comprising eminent non-political persons) to consult with the nation on drafting a new constitution or amend the current one. Needless to say, after being handed power in mid-May, the APNU-AFC broke those as well as other promises.
A date for local elections was announced but outside of the time frame promised. Nevertheless, credit goes to the coalition for holding an election whereas the preceding PPP regime showed little interest in holding local government elections which were some 18 years overdue. In fact, the PPP was forced into early election over a refusal to hold local elections, among other reasons.
On constitutional reform, a steering committee was appointed to look at the modalities for reforming the constitution, but not the reforms themselves. The convenor was AFC Chairman Nigel Hughes and it comprised political folks but with no PPP affiliates to give it balance. The committee submitted a report (though later than promised) to the government that has not been seen by the nation.
Prior to the May election, I spoke with several lawyers including the respected Ralph Ramkarran on constitutional reform. They all agreed that constitutional reform was needed; in fact almost the entire nation wanted constitutional reform. Almost every lawyer was convinced that the APNU+AFC coalition, if elected, would commit to constitutional reform, and a large number (including many former PPP supporters) said they would vote for the coalition because they wanted change. Some of the more eminent lawyers were absolutely convinced that the coalition would not backtrack on constitutional reform if elected to office. Some eight months later, there is no major sign of constitutional reform.
As I told lawyers and others there was not likely to be constitutional reform in Guyana regardless of which party was elected; few politicians keep their promises and virtually none gives up powers after being sworn into office. Few politicians in any part of the globe, in spite of what they say, have voted to reduce their powers; they do not want to give up power or empower people. That is their very nature. As an illustration, in India non-politician Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal of Delhi state promised during last year’s election campaign to reduce the powers of state officials if elected; a year later after being elected by a landslide, he is hedging and demanding even more powers. It does not appear that the ruling coalition or the PPP opposition will go for constitutional reform to empower the people or reduce their powers.
So will there be constitutional reform? And will the coalition government appoint an independent commission tasked with making recommendations for (or to draft) a new constitution? Will the people be consulted on a new constitution? Will people be given a choice? Will a new constitution be approved by the population? People are not convinced power will be given to the population. Will the coalition prove them wrong?
Yours faithfully,
Vishnu Bisram
