Former President Donald Ramotar has defended his predecessor, Bharrat Jagdeo’s right to immunity in relation to the Pradoville 2 investigation saying that it was not criminal and cannot be compared to other global leaders who were impeached for various transgressions.
“There is no way they can justify the wrongful arrest of him. He was the sitting president at the time and did no wrong in the Pradoville matter,” Ramotar told Stabroek News yesterday as he waded into Minister of State Joseph Harmon for saying that it was up to the police to decide if Jagdeo is covered by the immunity provision in the constitution.
“He has the right of immunity as is stated in the constitution and he did no wrong in the Pradoville matter. You cannot justify his arrest with that of South Korean President Park Geun-hye. That is reckless because the two situations are vastly different. It is like comparing apples and oranges and I am surprised at the levels Harmon has taken,” he added.
Ramotar was responding to Harmon arguing that the constitutional protection cannot necessarily save a president from criminal prosecution and that it is up to the police to determine whether the former president has immunity in the Pradoville 2 probe.
Article 182 of the constitution provides for immunity for a president. It states that a president cannot be charged for offences committed while in office and that a president is protected from being personally answerable to the courts whether in civil or criminal proceedings for actions done while in office.
Harmon was asked at last Thursday’s post-Cabinet press briefing about government’s views on the Article and whether there will be any moves to change it. In response, he said that the constitution is very clear on issues relating to the immunity of a sitting president who takes certain steps while he is in office. That is respected, he said, before saying that he believed it must be one of the matters to be looked at in the constitutional reform process.
“…Certainly even though there are immunities, there are certain exceptions because you cannot commit an egregious type of act—which is something that an international court or anybody can deem to be as such—and still believe that nothing will happen,” he said while making reference to the recent impeachment of the South Korean President.
“The court determined that there were enough grounds for that president to be impeached and she was impeached and most likely she will also face criminal charges,” he added.
Jagdeo, who is now the Leader of the Opposition, was arrested at his office on Tuesday by officers of the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU), who questioned him about the sale of land at Pradoville 2 at undervalued prices to members who served in his Cabinet.
Jagdeo later told reporters that he invoked his presidential immunity after being questioned and was subsequently told that he was free to go. “I asked, ‘Are you asking me questions in my private capacity or my official capacity at that time? Cause if you are doing that, you are going to breach the veil of official immunity for official acts. That will have far reaching consequences in this country because anything that [President David] Granger does as president in his official capacity too will be challenged,” he said, while adding that the SOCU officers did not answer his questions.
Harmon, who is an attorney, was asked about Jagdeo’s invocation of immunity and he quickly pointed out that it is up to the police to make that determination and he made it clear that the government will not interfere in the investigation, which is being done by an arm of the police force, SOCU.
‘Disagreed’
The former president disagreed with Harmon and said that “the law is the law” and that the Pradoville investigations not only did not require Jagdeo’s answers but that it was unlawful to arrest him to begin with.
Harmon had also noted that Article 182 gives immunity to the president while he is in office but added that the situation in Guyana has evolved. “…The anticipation I believe [and] the expectation of the framers of our constitution was that a president, once he leaves office, will basically have a more quiet, sedate life but the situation in Guyana is totally different. They have people who have been in office as president and are now in the National Assembly,” he said, before questioning if the protection still exists now that the former president is once more active in politics. “So how could you now claim those immunities while you are actively engaged in day-to-day politics?’ he asked.
And making an apparent reference to Ramotar, Harmon pointed out that government is irked by the writings of a former president who writes almost every week in the newspapers on issues that require responses. “Usually a president is given certain levels of courtesy but if in fact by their actions after they leave office they descend into the arena, then I would say that you would have to be dealt with by the persons in the arena.”
‘Inherited’
But Ramotar said it would be a “ludicrous” expectation for anyone to assume that when a former state leader demits office they would live a mundane life as is believed by Harmon.
“The drafters of our constitution recognized the importance of immunities and it was not a PPP (People’s Progressive Party) thing because many aspects of the constitution we inherited and when it was amended It was done by a joint broad committee where the secretary of that committee was a Deputy Prime Minister in an earlier PNC regime, and I speak of Haslyn Parris.”
“I am very surprised at Mr. Harmon’s position. He has taken a position against our constitution. The PPP is not the first party that had former presidents that remained in active politics. Mr. Desmond Hoyte was President of Guyana and he later became leader of the opposition, after his party lost. He remained very active in politics and no one ever questioned his immunities that he had as president. We would not have because we know the law. Aside from Mr. Hoyte there are many other heads of government in the Caribbean and around the world that remain in politics. Once a politician, in a leading capacity, always a politician I believe.”
Further he added, “I don’t know if Mr. Harmon wants to take away the immunities I have to stop me from writing but I am not writing under any immunity. I am not writing on decisions I made in office but what is happening today and I may draw a comparison. If he is uncomfortable with the performance of the regime then the regime needs to do better. They need to stop and remove the parking meters, reverse the decision about closing and decimating the sugar industry and reverse a lot of the taxation they have placed on the backs of people and treat all Guyanese equally. If they do that then I think he might not be so uncomfortable with my writings. And because Harmon is also an attorney by profession, Ramotar said that he “expected better” of him.
He reminded that Harmon, as a member of parliament also enjoys certain immunities and that he is sure that he would have used some of them.
