So what is a Constitution anyway? For the purpose of this brief piece let’s settle on: “The document containing the body of principles and laws upon which a State is organized and governed”.
Some constitutions, of course, contain guiding principles and aspirations of the country from earliest organized government to current modern concepts – to which all citizens are expected to adhere. Frequently, elected representatives find reasons to AMEND existing legislation, usually for the better.
(After apartheid fell, contemporary and free South Africans described their latest (current) Constitution as “The Birth Certificate of the Nation”).
Most Guyanese, it must be conceded, cared little about the successive Constitutions fashioned to govern their existence. I recall that as a teenager in the sixties, a now-still brilliant Caribbean lawyer, then a PPP-Government Attorney-General, drafted a Constitution which the Opposition PNC found objectionable. The PNC dubbed that “Fenton Ramsahoye Constitution a “Gasolene Constitution”. The reason for that description is a complex and amusing one but, suffice to say, that incident summed up the attitude of indifference to Constitutions which the average working-class Guyanese citizens displayed.
After Independence and Republicanism, Forbes Burnham, determined to prescribe more “nationalist” characteristics in his version of a Constitution, came up with the 1980 Constitution. The then PPP Opposition was livid about: the power and immunity of the Presidency; the nature of the Elections Commission and the method of composition of other Commissions and Constitutional bodies, among many, many other concerns.
Eleven years after the PPP’s 1992 return to power (in 2003) AMENDMENTS were effected to sections, clauses of the Burnham 1980 Constitutions . So what Guyanese actually have now to govern their State and then lives, is STILL AN AMENDED VERSION OF A BURNHAM LEGACY. And, believe it or not, certain once – contentious articles, were left as they were!
To be frank, for me, one lovely, desirable thing has happened since Elections November 2011: more Guyanese are paying interest and attention to this “Thing” – The Constitution of Guyana. For example, many interesting groups, along with the Parliamentary Opposition, point, relentlessly, to ARTICLE 13.
This is the Article that “guarantees” all Guyanese (and their representative organizations) the RIGHT to be INVOLVED in decision-making in areas “that directly affect their well-being” , Article 13, they say, is the Constitutional guarantee of Guyana’s “INCLUSIONARY DEMOCRACY.” I’ll tell you my views on that (aspiration/ideal) next time. Don’t believe it!
Readers interested in Guyanese affairs will be aware of the on-going robust Judicial/Constitutional tussles between the Government’s Attorney-General and the Opposition. The High Court and the Chief Justice are frequently asked to arbitrate as to whether the Parliament or the Courts of Law can intrude upon aspects of the Assembly’s authority. The Guyana Constitution is now high-profile. But like the Holy Bible, every group claims various sections vindicate their positions. It is as if “hijacking” of specific clauses is rampant.
Until I return to some crucial Articles of the 1980/2003 Constitution, let me assure the world that Guyana’s Constitution, one of high aspirations and ideals, is replete with all the, fundamental rights and freedoms. Any democracy needs. Some other countries constitutions contain few of these. We must return to the Guyana Constitution. Soon.
You must be logged in to post a comment.