Dear Editor,
The President’s power must not be unlimited.
These are quotes from the 6-1 majority decision of CCJ, that Act No 17 of 2001 of Guyana’s Constitution was validly enacted. Guyana’s High Court and Court of Appeal decision in favour of a third Presidential term was over overruled.
Sir Dennis said, “It was clear from the history of the amendments that they did not emerge from the desire of any political party to manipulate the presidency according to its agenda.”
Sir Dennis concluded that the amendments laid out in the Act were a single item in a suite of constitutional amendments designed to reflect the evolving democracy in Guyana.
The 1999 Constitutional Reform Commission had conducted nationwide consultations in Guyana to make the Constitution more relevant to the needs of citizens and reduce racial and political tensions in the country. The CCJ had these in mind when handing down the ruling.
Did the Court of Appeal judges take into consideration, any of the above when they upheld President Granger’s unilateral selection of the GECOM chair?
Setting restrictions on what a president can and cannot do, is democracy at work.
When was a democracy intended to place unrestricted power in a single individual?
Yours faithfully,
Faiyaz
