Dear Editor,
The US Supreme Court handed down a landmark ruling on July 1st on Presidential or Chief Executive power. The ruling should be studied by Guyanese lawyers and our judicial system in Guyana – High Court, Appeal Court and CCJ. As in other precedent setting cases, the US Supreme Court re-established itself as the arbiter of all legal disputes involving powers and as the institution that determines powers of the three branches of government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial).
Leaving out the parties in the case, the US Supreme Court empowers the President – immunes the Chief Executive from prosecution for official acts and denies immunity for unofficial acts. The apex court gave some specifics of what are official acts but largely has left it up to the lower court to decide what is an official and an unofficial act. The litigant, Donald Trump, has been given immunity for many of the charges for which he was indicted and was awaiting trial for alleged criminal misconduct. His indictment has been remanded back to the lower court for correction.
American courts generally rule along ideological lines depending on the President who appointed them. Democratic or Republican President appointed judges tend to render ruling that favours either of the two parties. The court ruled 6-3 in favour of Trump. All six judges who ruled in Trump’s favour were appointed by Republicans with Trump appointing three of them during his four years in office. The other three judges were appointed by a President who was a Democrat.
The ruling has been far reaching, demonstrating that a court could restrict or expand the powers of a President. The main take away from the ruling is that the court decides on the powers of the Chief Executive. Earlier compositions of the court expanded powers of the Chief Executive while some other earlier rulings restricted the powers of the President. President George Bush Sr., for example, said he had line item veto on budgeting and by extension legislation. The Supreme Court disagreed and denied him that power.
The Chief Executive of Guyana has enormous powers, more powerful than the American President over the sovereign. Some of the powers are contradictory vis-à-vis powers of citizens and local governments. Lawyers should test the court especially on powers that challenge those exercised by the Chief Executive regardless of which party is in office.
Judges should decide whether the Chief Executive should have such extraordinary powers especially that the people were never given an opportunity to decide on the powers of the President and the central government.
Citizens and local governments should seek judicial intervention whenever they feel that their powers have been usurped. The people and local governments (NDCs) should have maximum powers while the government (Chief Executive) should have least powers.
Sincerely,
Vishnu Bisram
