The Ministry of the Presidency (MoTP) has flayed commentator Ralph Ramkarran for his column in the last Sunday Stabroek where he criticised President David Granger over his handling of nominees for the chairmanship of GECOM and for not accepting that he must fix a date for general election since article 106(6) and (7) of the constitution have been activated.
In a lengthy statement on Sunday on Ramkarran’s contribution entitled `The President is transporting Guyana into a dystopian reality’, MoTP noted that the Senior Counsel is also a co-founder of A New and United Guyana and that he had seemingly joined the anti-government critics who have “sought to distort” the President’s actions relative to the appointment of a GECOM Chair and the holding of General and Regional Elections (GRE).
Ramkarran had charged that Granger was virtually demanding to name the GECOM Chairman by insisting that his nominees be placed on the list of six “not unacceptable” names to be submitted by Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo. Ramkarran’s column was written before the selection on Friday of Justice (Rtd) Claudette Singh as GECOM Chairman by Granger from a list supplied by Jagdeo. Nevertheless Ramkarran said the column remained relevant.
MoTP in addressing the President’s stance on the GECOM nominees said that Granger on 19th July 2019 in an interview done on ‘The Public Interest’, was asked whether he believed the rejection of his nominees by the Leader of the Opposition would hamper the way forward relative to the “hammering out” of the list of nominees to be formally submitted to him by the Leader of the Opposition.
MoTP said that Granger replied: “Well, it is a recipe for gridlock. The important thing which the CCJ aimed at is to ensure consensualism. That is to say, there must be a spirit of compromise, there must acceptance of … a role of the president in hammering out the list and similarly both sides are to aim at having a list of candidates which are not unacceptable to the President. Unless we accept that principle we are going to end up in gridlock and that is what we are heading for if the Opposition continues to deny the President a role in hammering out that list.”
MoTP said that the Head of State, later in that interview, acknowledged that the use of the term “gridlock” may be have been too strong an expression. He then committed to meeting the Leader of the Opposition to resolve any problems that may have arisen during the process to hammer out the six names.
“Although, I used the word gridlock it might be a strong expression. I do feel that there might be a misunderstanding on the part of the Opposition, and I am prepared to sit with the Leader of the Opposition to arrive at an interpretation of what the CCJ said.
“As far as I am concerned, the CCJ was quite clear and it means that the President must have a role; must have a role. That is the word the CCJ used `must’ have a role and I would resist any attempt to prevent me from exercising the function that has been given to me by the CCJ. The role of the President in the crafting and hammering out of the list must be respected,” said the President.
Observers have noted that the President and his supporters continue to misrepresent what the CCJ said. The CCJ suggested consultation between the two leaders but the list of six remains the Opposition Leader’s own and there is no requirement for him to place on it any names submitted by the President.
Ludicrous
MoTP said that Ramkarran’s suggestion that the President had no right to be involved in the selection process was ludicrous. It said that President Granger has never indicated that he would select his own nominee but that he had made clear that he has a role to play in the shortlisting of persons not unacceptable to him.
“It would be spurious if the opposition insists on exclusively crafting that list or unilaterally crafting that list. The CCJ ruling makes it impossible for that to occur,” President Granger said in the 19th July interview.
MoTP noted that Ramkarran in his Sunday Stabroek column referred also to a Stabroek News report on the President’s meeting with members of civil society dated 26th July.
Ramkarran opined that based on President Granger’s statements at that forum on the issue of non-interference in the work of the Elections Commission and the fact that no coercive orders were issued by the CCJ, “the President could still refuse to dissolve Parliament and fix a date for elections.”
“The Ministry of the Presi-dency wishes to remind Mr. Ramkarran that the President has repeatedly committed to the holding of credible, free and fair elections in the shortest possible time”, MoTP said.
MoTP cited Justice Adrian Saunders, President of the CCJ on 12th July as saying, “Article 106 of the Constitution invests in the President and the National Assembly and implicitly in GECOM responsibilities that impact on the precise timing of the Elections which must be held. It would not therefore be right for the Court, by the issuance of coercive orders or detailed directives, to presume to instruct these bodies on how they must act and thereby pre-empt the performance by them of their constitutional responsibilities. It is not, for example, the role of the Court to establish a date on or by which the elections must be held, or to lay down timelines and deadlines that, in principle, are the preserve of political actors guided by constitutional imperatives.”
MoTP said that the Head of State has abided by the rulings of the Court and has repeatedly stated that it is for the Elections Commission to guide him on its readiness to conduct GRE. Thereafter, he shall name a date for GRE.
Observers have said that the President has to call a date for elections and GECOM has to work towards meeting that date. They note that it would be absurd if GECOM could determine if and when elections should be held particularly as 106 (7) of the constitution states a specific timeframe for holding elections consequent upon a successful motion of no confidence.
MoTP said that during both of his meetings with the Diplomatic Corps and Civil Society on July 26, the President reminded that “The independence of the Elections Commission is safeguarded by the Constitution. It is insulated from political influence, instruction and interference. The President cannot influence, the President cannot instruct, the President cannot interfere, the President cannot tell the Elections Commission when elections must be held neither can the Courts.”
MoTP quote Article 62 of the constitution and said that it is clear that while it is the Elections Commission which supervises elections and has to execute its mandate independently, the President must first be advised by Commission of its readiness to conduct elections.
MoTP said that it would be “whimsical” for the President to name a date for elections and the Elections Commission is unprepared.
“President Granger has not deviated from the Court’s guidelines or ruling. He has accepted that his Government is an ‘interim’ government due to the passage of the no-confidence motion…
“The Government, the President said will comply with the orders issued by the CCJ that, during this ‘interim’ period, it will restrain the exercise of its legal authority…
“Having regard to the aforementioned, it boggles the mind that Mr. Ramkarran would proceed, like the Stabroek News he writes for, in a stupid excursion aimed at furthering the distorted view that the President has delayed the elections process”, MoTP said.
Ramkarran had said in the column that “By his imaginative interpretations, the President is transporting Guyana into a dystopian reality. It’s like being asked to believe that the earth is flat”.
Ramkarran also rapped the international community for not taking a stand on violations of the constitution arising from the passage of the motion of no confidence on December 21, 2018.
