Attorney General Anil Nandlall SC has rejected the position of former Chancellor of the University of Guyana, Dr Bertrand Ramcharan that shades of autocracy are evident here.
Speaking on his “issues in the News” programme on Facebook, Nandlall asserted that global academics. scholars and legal luminaries and the courts have examined this country’s constitution and government’s actions and to date there has never been such an accusation.
The attorney said that while Ramcharan is a distinguished international lawyer and Is highly qualified, his interpretation of how this government operates is flawed and if his analysis was fair he would see that the constitutional architecture and legal framework show democracy at all levels and that this country’s executive, legislature and judiciary operate and function independently.
“He proffered a contention that Guyana and the Government of Guyana exhibits shades of autocracy and that the government and Guyana may be categorized as autocratic. An autocratic government or state is equivalent to a dictatorship…it is not a demo-cracy it is not a democratic government and those in charge of the state don’t practice the rules and principles of democracy and concepts in their discharge of government functions,” Nandlall said.
“I want to reject vehemently that categorization and classification of the government and state of Guyana. I reject his hypothesis, his classification…,” he added.
He said that a democratic Guyana under the PPP/C, the constitution and the governance structure is there for the public to assess for themselves and to determine if it is autocratic or democratic. When this analysis is done, he said, there can be no doubt that the PPP/C is not one of only the most transparent but that its actions are democratically inclusive.
“Guyana is governed by a constitution and has been an independent state for nearly six decades …Never has there been an allegation or a contention that Guyana’s constitutional structure is undemocratic in its nature or inherently…From all the analysis that has been done of the Guyana constitution,” he said, while making an except for the 1980s under the rule of Forbes Burnham and the constitution at that time which gave him vast executive powers.
When Ramcharan argues that Guyana has shades of autocracy he said that “he is wrong…because that doesn’t exist in Guyana”. Nandlall asserted that this country is “more democratic than many other countries in the Caribbean”.
He said Ramcharran probably makes his case based on the way the state is governed and is again wrong as Guyana is a “ lifeblood of democracy at work.”
One look at the courts he said and a person can judge that they are independent. However, he noted that there is also freedom to criticise the courts.
“The judiciary is free to rule how it wants. The government is free to criticize the judiciary. The ruling of the judiciary when it is a ruling against the government is a criticism of the government. Criticism is a two-way street…it is part of the democratic policy of a country”, Nandlall asserted.
He said that differing views on the judiciary are seen through appeals and many times when those go to Guyana’s top court, the Caribbean Court of Justice they are reversed.
“So where is this autocracy as opposed to a democracy?” he questioned.
Nandlall said that there is no censorship of free speech here nor are there impediments to those who share information. “Is the government checking what type of equipment is coming in to bring greater control of the people? To prohibit them from exercising their rights of freedom? so where is the autocracy this gentleman is talking about? I can go on and on and on to give you live examples to show you democracy is alive in this country.
He pointed to trade unions saying they are given free rein to operate. “Are trade unions allowed to exercise their rights and freedoms? Of course they are!” he said.
Predilection
Ramcharan, in an August 27 column in Stabroek News, underlined what he saw as autocratic tendencies in the current government and the predilection of the opposition PNCR towards the rigging of elections.
Both of these tendencies, he posited, have placed the country at a precipice with elections approaching next year.
Framing his argument in the backdrop of a recent book by Anne Applebaum entitled Autocracy Inc, Ramcharan cited the author’s declaration that “There is no liberal world order anymore, and the aspiration to create one no longer seems real. But there are liberal societies, open and free countries that offer a better chance for people to live useful lives than closed dictatorships do. They are hardly perfect. Those that exist have deep flaws, profound divisions, and terrible historical scars. But that’s all the more reason to defend and protect them.”
He posited: “In Guyana, we have recently seen official inquisitions into the tax status of NGOs, calls for new laws to ‘regulate’ NGOs, and public campaigns of vilification against particular NGOs and their leaders. There are shades of autocracy here, without a doubt. And Guyana has also seen ‘highest level’ admonitions of judges carrying out their duties in good faith”.
While Ramcharan did not mention it, the Guyana Government is working on legislation aimed at registering non-governmental organisations (NGO).
The move will likely raise concerns in light of recent attacks by senior government officials on NGOs in what has been seen as an attempt to limit the space available to them. There are also concerns that their access to funding could come under threat.
“There are also other shades of autocracy: Parliamentary scrutiny of governmental activity is minimal, if existent. Governmental consultation with the opposition is hardly existent. Oil money has made the Government lush with funds for information campaigns. And an Oracle in the ruling party pronounces on all matters, big and small. The spirit of governance smells of autocracy”, Ramcharan declared.
His allusion to an Oracle was seen as a reference to Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo.
Guyana’s historical record, he said, is thus a blemished one when it comes to assessing it from the perspectives of autocracy and democracy: one party has subverted elections, while the other party practices “All is mine.”
“This has been the most inclusive government, the most community-based government. For us, people are the centre of everything we do. We consult with the people and the government was elected by the people based on a manifesto,” Ali said last week Wednesday as he emphatically defended his party’s governance style in response to a question from Stabroek News on Ramcharan’s assertion.
“The government has that responsibility to implement that manifesto and that is all the government is doing; implementing that manifesto, but apparently democracy excludes the government from defending itself. These great intellectuals… these great upholders of the shroud to democracy, only they have the god given right to be critical and defend themselves,” he added.
