French writer, Albert Camus popularised the philosophy of the absurd in his works, including the essay, “The Myth of Sisyphus,” about the cunning Greek king, condemned to a cruel fate.
The influential 1942 classic compares the absurdity of man’s life and the restless search for meaning, unity and comprehension with that of the slippery Sisyphus who was punished by vengeful Gods for his deceit and cruelty, by having to forever push a large boulder up a steep hill, only to see it roll down again.
To a weary populace expected to find faith that it is not all a futile farce during the dizzying descents, Guyana’s definite dysfunctional drama drags on over the choice of qualified nominees for the unenviable post of Elections Commission Chairman, like the latest task in a Sisyphean series to successfully stage the next critical polls, given the time wasting since the clear rulings and overly-optimistic urgings of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).
The mutual mistrust and corrosive lack of consensus, that have haunted our ruling duopoly for more than half a century, intensified following the December 21, 2018-shock passage of the no-confidence motion enabled by the single crossover vote of then AFC backbencher, Charrandass Persaud who is in Canadian self-exile. At the time of writing, last-minute meetings between representatives of the besieged coalition APNU government and the Opposition People’s Progressive Party (PPP) have the polarised pair still seemingly locked in complicated contortions to outdo the other with the planned perusal of lists old and new, previously discarded and Presidential.
Of the 11 individuals proposed by Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo, “four have been shortlisted, two are under active consideration and five of those names were rejected,” according to Government’s delegate, Joseph Harmon, the Director General of the Ministry of the Presidency. Harmon indicated that eight others only suggested days ago by President David Granger in an unprecedented surprise move, will be reviewed at a follow-up session scheduled for this afternoon. Mr. Jagdeo may also hand in even further names for consideration.
Efforts to ascertain if this meant that the six select names were now “not unacceptable” to the President proved unsuccessful, the Opposition noted in a statement, adding “We were also seeking clarity on what ‘active consideration’ means versus ‘shortlisted’ and none was given.”
In its ruling, the CCJ said, “employment of the double negative, ‘not unacceptable’, signals that an onus is placed on the President not to find a nominee unacceptable merely because the nominee is not a choice the President would have himself made. The President should only find a nominee unacceptable for some good reason on objective grounds. If a President were permitted, capriciously or whimsically, without proffering a good reason, to reject eligible nominees, this would frustrate the proper working of the Constitution, defeat the intention behind the amendment to Article 161(2) and pave the way for unilateral presidential appointment.”
The CCJ found, “Once the President and the Leader of the Opposition have hammered out a list of names not unacceptable to the President, the list, comprising the six persons, must then formally be submitted to the President by the Leader of the Opposition and the President must then select the Chairman from among those names. This approach gives the President a role in the identification of the six names, but it obviates the possibility that, after the formal presentation of the list, the President could suggest that one or more of the names, or indeed the entire list, is ‘unacceptable’. Unilateral appointment by the President in keeping with the proviso to Article 161(2) can hardly be an option if the Leader of the Opposition demonstrates a willingness to engage in good faith…”
The Granger Presidential picks include Justice (Retired) James Patterson who resigned as head of the Commission in the wake of the CCJ’s June 18-last landmark findings that the process leading up to his unilateral appointment was flawed and in breach of the Constitution.
Judges have scrutinised submissions from the squabbling sides, and now with only a day to go before the country’s final court issues consequential orders in a bid to resolve the crisis, it remains to be seen how the reluctant CCJ can give full effect to what the Constitution says without being viewed by some inevitably disgruntled party as political.
In his masterpiece, Camus argued that the quest for clarity in a world of the absurd requires revolt not philosophical suicide. “Thinking is learning all over again how to see, directing one’s consciousness, making of every image a privileged place,” he observed, declaring, “What I believe to be true I must therefore preserve. What seems to me so obvious, even against me, I must support.”
“The Theatre of the Absurd” refers to the literary movement in drama that sprung up in Europe, based on the theories of Camus, particularly “The Myth of Sisyphus” and man’s perennial struggle to understand his world. The Hungarian-born British producer and scholar, Martin Esslin, created the term in his 1962 eponymous book. Three years later, the American actor and director Ronald Tavel coined the phrase “Theatre of the Ridiculous” to describe his own work, recognised as the beginning of the genre. Referencing Esslin’s concept, Tavel promoted the first performances with the infamous one-sentence manifesto: “We have passed beyond the absurd: our position is absolutely preposterous.”
Tavel wrote and staged several cheeky plays including the most memorable satire on the Indian population crisis, “Indira Gandhi’s Daring Device” which caused an international uproar since it depicted the then Prime Minister as bewitched by a giant stage phallus. In March 1967, the play was presented at Columbia and Rutgers Universities, and so shocked students that it was reported to the Indian Consulate which sued the Playhouse for defamation. While the group escaped with a small fine, high legal costs caused the Playhouse to soon close. The Indian Foreign Minister warned Washington that “Indo-American relations were bound to suffer” should there be further showings.
Camus, who received the 1957 Nobel Prize for Literature would conclude in his work, “I leave Sisyphus at the foot of the mountain! One always finds one’s burden again. But Sisyphus teaches the higher fidelity that negates the gods and raises rocks. He too concludes that all is well. This universe henceforth without a master seems to him neither sterile nor futile. Each atom of that stone, each mineral flake of that night-filled mountain, in itself forms a world. The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man’s heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”
We have to imagine and hope, as well, that the patriotic Guyanese people, given all the boulders they have been made to carry at home and wherever they have scattered, will, one day, be able to know real happiness. For, as Camus conceded, “If it were sufficient to love, things would be too easy.”
ID looks back at the Chinese Sisyphus, Wu Gang who endlessly cuts down a self-healing tree as a divine penalty, and the Indian folkloric figure, Naranath Branthan or “The madman of Naranam” condemned to always roll a big stone up and down a Kerala hill.
