Proposals for constitutional reform should come from the people following widespread consultations, President David Granger has reiterated though he has not given a timeline as to when he expects this to be accomplished.
“I don’t want a boardroom constitutional reform, I want a public discussion, I want people in their communities to meet and express their views. I don’t want a group of people sitting in a room saying what must be done,” Granger said during the Ministry of the Presidency programme, the Public Interest. He did not give any indication as to a timeline for the process after being asked whether it would be pursued vigorously or whether it would be placed on the back burner. Specific mention was made of curbing the powers of the Executive.
The president said it is part of the agenda of the governing APNU+AFC coalition to initiate a process of constitutional reform and noting that attorney Nigel Hughes has presented a preliminary report, said the administration will be proceeding to discuss that report more fully.
“It is my view that given the controversy that has surrounded constitution reform…literally for nearly 40 years, we need to go to the people, find out what the people think, we need to have consultation and we need to listen to them,” Granger said, a point he had made before. He added that some people seem to have jumped to their conclusions and have their own ideas about the form that the reforms should take.
“My view is that the people know best and you better consult them. So yes, if it involves…taming…the powers of the Executive so let it be but let the people speak but don’t let us try to tell the people what to think. Let us find out what they need,” he said, even as he urged outreach to communities to “find out what the people really want to see in their Constitution before we tell them…”
Questions have been raised about the government’s commitment to constitutional reform which it had been vocal in calling for prior to coming into office last year and which had formed a major plank of its campaign for office.
On Friday, outgoing Deputy Chief of Mission of the United States Embassy Bryan Hunt, had urged constitutional reform and told the nation’s leaders that bringing about that change requires going beyond conferences and workshops on social cohesion. “Significant constitutional reform is essential. Power must be decentralised, the winner-takes-all system must be abolished. Communities must be given greater political control at the local level. Those who lose elections, whether in the past or present or future, need to accept their defeat and relinquish power gracefully rather than railing against the system,” he emphasised.
The APNU+AFC coalition had highlighted constitutional reform in its manifesto released during the general elections campaign last year. The manifesto stated that within the first 100 days of the formation of a Government of National Unity a number of things would be done including the “Establishment of a Constitutional Reform Committee with a mandate to complete consultations, draft amendments and present same to the National Assembly for approval within nine months.” A year has since gone by but nothing has reached the National Assembly.
The coalition had trumpeted constitutional reform several times in its manifesto. One reference said that “APNU+AFC recognizes that the Constitution, in its current form, does not serve the best interest of Guyana or its people. Within three months of taking up office, APNU+AFC will appoint a Commission to amend the Constitution with the full participation of the people. The new Constitution will put the necessary checks and balances in place to consolidate our ethos of liberal democracy. Freedom of speech, reduction of the power of the President and the Bill of Rights will be enshrined in the document.”
Immediately
Another reference spoke to “immediately” appointing a Constitutional Reform Commission consisting of representatives of all major stakeholders – trades unions, the private sector, religious and faith-based organisations, women, youths, professional organizations and the University. “Its mandate will be to undertake the urgent task of fashioning comprehensive reforms, for early implementation, designed to guarantee a democratic society free from the abuse of citizens by those in high office fuelled by the exercise of arbitrary powers and behaviour by the Executive which is inconsistent with the spirit and provisions of the Constitution,” the document said.
Prior to the elections, Granger had told Stabroek News that if elected, the coalition promises within its first 100 days to announce a date for Local Government Elections, free up the telecoms and ICT sectors and set up a constitution reform body and the Public Procurement Commission among other things.
Meantime, in his Sunday Stabroek column, former Speaker of the National Assembly Ralph Ramkarran said that he was pleased that Hunt had called for constitutional reform and expressed the view that the diplomatic community needs to publicly get behind the drive for real constitutional reform. He pointed out that the politics of power acts as impediment for the political parties.
“…while there is a growing consensus that Guyana cannot move forward without constitutional reform that reduces the grip of the winner-take-all system, it is constrained by the politics of power,” Ramkarran wrote. He said that the response of the two main political parties to a question in this regard would be telling. The question to APNU would be: Are you prepared now to give up close to half of your government ministries to the PPP? The question to the PPP would be: Having regard to your belief that you will win the next general elections, are you prepared now to negotiate giving close to half of your government’s ministries to APNU if you win?
“Unless there is an unconditional ‘yes’ answer to these questions by each political party, (there will necessarily be qualifications and conditions) constitutional reform of the depth we are talking about is not likely to happen without pressure. Guyana will therefore need all the help it can get, including a major push by the diplomatic community,” Ramkarran declared.
Government had set up a Steering Committee on Constitutional Reform (SCCR) to lay the groundwork for a new constitutional reform process and at the end of April, it handed over its final report to Prime Minister Moses Nagamootooo.
Among other things, the SCCR recommended a reduction of immunities for the President, limiting the powers to prorogue or dissolve Parliament and excluding the Attorney General from Cabinet so the holder of that office remains unbiased and impartial. It envisioned the completion of the entire process within 18 months.
The body recommended a three-tiered reform system where a group of legal experts on the Constitution Reform Commission (CRC) would prepare a draft document encompassing some of the SCCR’s recommendations. This will then be distributed to stakeholders including representatives of political parties and civil society. The CRC will then be expanded to include representatives of political parties and civil society. The expanded CRC will then deliberate on submissions received and prepare a report which is to be perfected by its legal experts. This report will then be taken to the National Assembly for debate after which a referendum or some other method would be employed for the prospective adopting of the recommendations.
Since independence, there have been several exercises to change the Constitution utilising different mechanisms. The first attempt after the Independence Constitution was in 1980 when the mechanism was a Constituent Assembly established by a motion of the National Assembly and comprising mainly the National Assembly. The second effort was after the 1992 elections when the National Assembly established a Special Select Committee by motion. It did not complete its work by 1997 when the National Assembly was dissolved for the 1997 elections. The most recent process was in 1999-2000 by the Constitution Reform Commission, which was established by the Constitution Reform Commission Act. By agreement among the political parties, the Act provided that the Commission be comprised of political parties and civil society.
