The Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA) has warned that unless the constitutional reform process starts soon in a purposeful and inclusive manner, its results will not be incorporated into the next electoral process and the hopes of yet another generation of Guyanese will be dashed.
In a statement issued yesterday, the GHRA said that it was encouraged by President David Granger’s recent proclamation that he would like to see a constitutional reform process that is more thorough than that proposed by the Committee on Constitutional Reform.
According to the body, the committee established by the government for constitutional reform falls short of being fit for the purpose as it is monopolised by lawyers, is operating with an agenda lacking ambition and is bereft of broad-based legitimacy.
The committee, which was appointed last August, includes attorney Nigel Hughes as convener, attorneys Gino Persaud and Geeta Chandan-Edmond and Professor Harold Lutchman. Constitution expert Haslyn Parris, who has since passed away, was also a member.
“Being accountable to party leaders rather than to the electorate has robbed our representational politics of the vitality political participation provides. A range of reforms are necessary, therefore, to make our national Constitution a genuine blueprint for democratically acceptable politics. Issues such as reformed Presidential powers and a Bill of Rights are two obvious features. However, the strongest argument is the need to convince party leaderships to replace their monopoly control of political decision-making. This will require a process led by broad-based, credible civic leadership, hence the need for constitutional reform,” it argued.
The GHRA noted that for years civic activism on political and constitutional issues has suffered from the fact that the formal political system of parliamentary representation is almost completely devoid of accountability to citizens. “As a result civic activism has had recourse to a series of informal, non-parliamentary coalitions, pressure groups and ad hoc forms of participation, accompanied by frequent reference to Article 13 of the Constitution. De-linked from formal channels to Parliament, such activity has over the years proven largely ineffective and frustrating,” it added.
The GHRA asserted that generating accountable political and electoral systems supportive of participatory politics is one object of a constitutional reform process. A second, it added, must be to encourage debate around the political values and principles that the country wishes to establish as the guiding framework for the society. “This implies a constitutional reform process which concerns itself with the kind of society we want to build. Will we drift along in the unquestioned belief that wealth and well-being are the same thing? How much should the government involve itself in social protection or the life of individual citizens?” the statement asks.
Granger, during a recording of the Ministry of the Presidency programme, The Public Interest, recently stated that proposals for constitutional reform should come from the people following widespread consultations. “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,” he said.
The APNU+AFC coalition had highlighted constitutional reform in the manifesto it 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.
