President David Granger yesterday justified the decision to have Attorney-General Basil Williams SC meet with a representative of Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo on the nominees for the chair of the Guyana Elections Commission (Gecom), while emphasising his desire to choose a candidate who is fit to be a judge.
“I did not feel that a non-lawyer like myself should engage a non-lawyer like the Leader of the Opposition because there may be further misunderstanding. So, I feel the quickest route is for two legal minds to interpret the clause, the Article,” the President said during a recording of ‘The Public Interest’ yesterday.
On Wednesday, Granger wrote Jagdeo suggesting that Williams meets a representative of his choice on issues surrounding the nominees for the Gecom chair, following his rejection of Jagdeo’s initial submission. Jagdeo subsequently agreed.
“I would like to propose that, in light of your request for a meeting and in order to avoid further misinterpretation or misunderstanding of this important constitutional matter, Mr. Basil Williams, Minister of Legal Affairs and Attorney General meet with a person of your choice,” Granger wrote to Jagdeo.
Noting that the president’s proposal was different from the legal clarification which he had previously promised to provide, Jagdeo nonetheless said that he would acquiesce to Granger’s request.
Granger yesterday said he felt his recourse was best for all parties to getting the matter resolved quickest with an outcome that he anticipates would be favourable. “I did not want to prolong the discussion or deliberation because I felt it was quite simple. I felt that the constitution, in my mind, was very clear and I felt that once I had alerted the Leader of the Opposition to the fact that his first set of recommendations were not in accordance with the constitution, he would have submitted a second list,” he said.
“At this point in time, I feel it is purely constitutional, purely legal and I think the second course, the best course, would be for legal minds to engage the issue. I would like to bring this matter to a swift conclusion. It has been going on for too long and I believe this is the quickest route. That is why I did it,” he added.
He reiterated that he did not have a candidate in mind for the post but that for him the constitutional requirements should be met.
Asked what would be his next move if the process “goes nowhere,” Granger said, “The constitution is clear: Once the Leader of the Opposition fails to submit a list of persons who are not unacceptable, I would have to make a choice. But I would like to choose someone who is acceptable to both sides and who the general public is satisfied with. That is my desire but I would like to do it quickly because we have to make preparations for local government elections and other business that is being held up….”
He added, “The constitution is very clear. The important thing is we must not trivialise the appointment. The reason why the constitution is worded in such a way is to ensure that the nominee or nominees are persons of intelligence, persons of integrity and persons of impartiality. That is why they put so much emphasis on somebody who is a judge or is qualified to be a judge. You want somebody who possesses those three qualities… to be a judge, you should possess those three qualities. So, it is not any other person, and I feel that is what is misleading many of the commentators. They feel I can choose any other person and I am not going to do that. I am going to choose somebody who is fit to be a judge and who can discharge the functions of the office of the Chairman of the Elections Commission with integrity, with impartiality and with intelligence. So many writers seem to be putting so much emphasis on ‘any other fit and proper person.’ Fit and proper means you have to possess those three qualities.”
Article 161 (2) of the constitution states, “Subject to the provisions of paragraph (4), the Chairman of the Elections Commission shall be a person who holds or who has held office as a judge of a court having unlimited jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters in some part of the Commonwealth or a court having jurisdiction in appeals from any such court or who is qualified to be appointed as any such judge, or any other fit and proper person, to be appointed by the President from a list of six persons, not unacceptable to the President, submitted by the Leader of the Opposition after meaningful consultation with the non-governmental political parties represented in the National Assembly.”
Granger himself was previously nominated for the post under the ‘other fit and proper person’ proviso by then Opposition Leader Desmond Hoyte, although he has since said that any breaches that may have occurred in the past must not be repeated.
And while the president pointed out that he did not have a timeframe in mind for when the process would end, he felt that “the quicker the better.”
“I did not expect the process to last this long. The process could take place within a day or two, once the list is in conformity of the constitution and I am confident depending on who the Leader of the Opposition nominates, I am confident that that the dialogue between the Attorney General and that person would bring about an interpretation. Send that interpretation back to the Leader of the Opposition and myself and let’s make a decision,” the president asserted.
