When governments fall on a no-confidence motion, they typically resign, and elections are held to form a new government. But that’s not the case in Guyana where democracy is a mere sideshow, often whitewashed by hollow verbiage meant to deceive. And that’s pretty much true for most political statements in Guyana that are meant for public consumption. The case of President David’s Granger recent statement to the nation stands out as a mockery of democracy. He is reported in the local press, saying: “Guyanese,

the Constitution of Guyana is sacrosanct and supreme,” referring to the consequential orders issued by the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) following the government’s loss of the appeal of the no-confidence vote against it last December 21. Yet, contrary to what Granger said in public, he and his APNU+AFC coalition government unconstitutionally remain in power in Guyana, in spite of the fact that the CCJ ordered that he and his Cabinet must immediately resign and call general elections before September 18. The CCJ also agreed that the ruling party can act as a caretaker government until elections are held.
In fact, Guyana’s constitution is clear on the matter, stating that: “The Cabinet including the President shall resign if the Government is defeated by the vote of a majority of all the elected members of the National Assembly on a vote of confidence”.
But, the government continues to operate as normal, with the President proclaiming that “Cabinet has not stopped functioning”. Effectively, the APNU+AFC coalition has turned the political and judicial processes into a circus by refusing to adhere to the CCJ’s ruling.
Incidentally, following the no-confidence motion, the government immediately conceded defeat but it later challenged the validity of the vote on a comical mathematical formula, as well as on the grounds that MP Charrandass Persaud who voted against his own party was ineligible to vote because he is a dual Canadian citizen.
Ironically, it must be noted that several government MPs who also hold dual citizenship voted against the no-confidence motion. These MPs have subsequently resigned.
The ruling party initially lost its challenge to the no-confidence vote in the Guyana courts but appealed and subsequently won, leading to the appeal to the CCJ by the opposition leader, Bharat Jagdeo and private citizens.
In its judgement, handed down on June 18, the CCJ ruled in favor of Jagdeo, Charrandass Persaud and a private citizen, Christopher Ram who challenged the decision of Guyana Court of Appeal to strike down the controversial motion, which was passed by a slim 33 to 32 majority.
After ruling on the no-confidence case on June 18th, the CCJ gave all parties to the proceedings the opportunity to submit their own consequential orders that they would like to see made, and set July 12 for its decision. With no consensus on the consequential orders among the parties, the court handed down its decision.
The judges suggested that the Guyana Appeal Court made an incorrect decision when it decided that the formula for calculating the majority for the motion should be by dividing the number of national assembly members by two, rounding off and adding one. The rounding off results from Guyana having an uneven number of 65 members of parliament.
Rather, the CCJ stated that a simple majority, as was obtained on December 21, was all that was required for the passage of the no confidence motion.
In addition, the CCJ further ruled that Guyana's Constitution, which requires assembly members to indicate if they wish to vote against their party and be removed as a result, was not applicable in a no-confidence vote. The court stated that assembly members were allowed to vote against their party even if it meant them being removed afterward.
The court also rejected arguments from Guyana's Attorney General Basil Williams and political activist Compton Reid over whether Persaud's vote should also be invalidated as he had dual citizenship with Canada.
Although it ruled that Persaud had been unlawfully elected to the assembly, it stated that his position could have only been challenged in an election petition brought within 28 days of when he was elected in 2015.
The CCJ was also asked to consider a separate appeal from Opposition MP Mustapha Zulfikar, who challenged Granger's appointment of retired Judge James Patterson as chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM).
It ruled that Granger failed to give sufficient and compelling reasons for rejecting 18 candidates put forward by Jagdeo, before he went ahead to appoint Patterson in October 2017. Patterson subsequently resigned on June 25 but has since re-emerged as a ruling party nominee for the role.
In terms of determining Patterson’s replacement and setting an election date, CCJ President Adrian Saunders advised that Granger and Jagdeo should consult on appointing such individual within a reasonable time and using the guideline set in the substantive judgement. The CCJ also said it was not its responsibility to set an election date.
"These provisions need no gloss on the part of the court to render them intelligible and workable. Their meaning is clear and it is the responsibility of constitutional actors in Guyana to honour them," Saunders said. "It would not be right for the court by the issuance of coercive orders or detailed directives to pressure or instruct these bodies on how they should act and therefore pre-empt the performance by them of their constitutional responsibility."
However, the CCJ said elections must be held within three months of its June 18 decision. The three-month deadline may be extended only by a two-thirds vote by the assembly. Jagdeo has indicated that he would not return to the National Assembly to support an extension. The government, on the other hand, appears to want elections at a much later date, sometime in December.
In the meantime, Alliance for Change (AFC) Leader Khemraj Ramjattan said the CCJ cannot direct the executive branch of government but can only make appeals through consequential orders. He suggested that stating a date for Guyana’s next general elections is outside of the court’s ambit. “There can be exhortations from its consequential orders and I think that is probably as far as they can go, Ramjattan suggested. “We will so do as best as possible in the circumstances. We will do everything to ensure that those consequential orders are realized,” he said. Incidentally, not holding elections by September 18 is in violation of the constitution.
For now, the President is charged with the selection of a new GECOM chairman. The opposition has already submitted its list of nominees and some have been deemed unacceptable. This could emerge as another cause for an extension of the political circus.
Granger contends that he is prepared to appoint a Chairman of GECOM once he has the cooperation of Jagdeo. The issue of house-to- house registration of voters, which the government wants as a means of unilaterally extending its life, but which the opposition opposes, is another area of potential contention.
In reality, it is hardly likely that elections will be held by the constitutionally mandated date of September 18. It would seem that the ruling coalition party would go to great lengths to extend its life in office, without respect for any constitutional guidance or the court's order. That’s certainly not democratic and amounts to an abuse of power by the regime. It's time for the international community to speak up.

Georgetown – Three of the western communities are calling on stakeholders to move expeditiously by abiding with the recently orders of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).
The court had been approached after a number of legal challenges starting with the High Court on the December 21 no-confidence motion (NCM) which saw the government fall and provisions of the Constitution of Guyana triggered for elections within three months.
In the orders handed down last week by the Trinidad-headquartered CCJ, the court stopped short of announcing a date for early elections but pointed out that Constitution speaks to how matters should be handled.

In essence, the court told Guyana that “the President and the Leader of the Opposition should, as soon as possible, embark upon and conclude the process of appointing a new GECOM Chairman.”
Regarding the consolidated matters concerning the no-confidence motion, the CCJ noted that there is clear guidance in Article 106 of Guyana’s Constitution on what should happen next. The Court said that “upon the passage of a vote of no confidence, the Article requires the resignation of the Cabinet including the President.
The Article goes on to state, among other things, that notwithstanding its defeat, the Government shall remain in office and that an election shall be held “within three months, or such longer period as the National Assembly shall by resolution supported by not less than two-thirds of the votes of all the elected members of the National Assembly determine”.

The Court reminded, however, that it had rendered its decision on 18 June 2019. As to the precise orders it should make, the CCJ cautioned, however, that it is, “not the role of the Court to establish a date on, or by which, the elections must be held”.
The CCJ did express the view that it is expected that the Government will continue as a caretaker for the affairs of the country, but that in light of its caretaker role, it should be restrained in the use of its legal authority.
It was also the court’s view that a Chairman for GECOM should be embarked upon with “the utmost urgency”.
On Monday, the US, United Kingdom and the European Union urged that the issue be dealt with.
There was no mention of Canada in the joint statement.
“The United States of America Ambassador to Guyana, Ambassador Sarah-Ann Lynch, United Kingdom High Commissioner to Guyana, H.E. Greg Quinn, and the Head of Delegation of the European Union to Guyana, Ambassador Jernej Videti?, issued a joint statement following the issue of the Caribbean Court of Justice Definitive Orders on 12 July 2019.
“The Caribbean Court of Justice – Guyana’s Supreme Court – has spoken. It is important for the rule of law that all invoked actors abide by its ruling and the relevant provisions of the Constitution. We urge everyone to do so expeditiously.”
On Friday, President David Granger said he is prepared to hold early elections but that there must be a new Voters’ List prepared from house-to-house registration.
The Head of State was also critical of what he says is bad faith from the Opposition on the selection of a new GECOM chairman. The Opposition, on the other hand, is insisting that elections have to be held in three months, by September.
They insist that in keeping with the Constitution and the court rulings, Government merely has to perform a caretaker role in those three months until elections.

Georgetown – Last February the Public Infrastructure Ministry announced that a contract was signed for the rehabilitation of the Puruni Road, Region Seven (Cuyuni-Mazaruni). This was after weeks of public outcry from miners and other stakeholders regarding the deplorable state of the road surface.
The Contract indeed facilitated the rehabilitation and construction of the Itabali to Puruni Road surface to a point that proper accessibility was enjoyed temporarily. This ended in April when the weather pattern changed.
The works that were done then could not withstand the intense effects of the wet weather conditions. Once again the Road was in a deplorable state.
The responsibility for this Road falls specifically under the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC). The trail is mainly used by all to access the Gold Mining Districts of Puruni Number 3, Cuyuni Number 4, and the Middle Mazaruni area from the Papishou Landing.
The Puruni Road runs from the Community of Itaballi, Mazaruni River, through to the Papishou Landing in the Middle Mazaruni. It is the only entrance and exit to various key Sections of Region Seven.
The community of Itaballi is located a short distance up the Mazaruni River from the Municipality of Bartica, Region Seven. It is also connected to Bartica by road and a Pontoon Crossing over the Mazaruni River.
Although an $89 Million contract was awarded to JR Construction Services and Mekdeci Mining Company (MMC), to facilitate upgrade works back in 2017, miners and other Commuters are still praying for this Road to be fixed properly.
The current state of the road has now left miners and other road users fearful for their stocks and moreover their lives, as it becomes more and more difficult to use this Trail with the continuing rainy weather.
Persons are now being forced again to suspend their Operations at various intervals owing to the nearly impassable state of this Road.
Frustrated miners who are obligated to use the trail with their vehicles have been experiencing the full discomfort, in having their faith tested and their financial resources put way beyond their extreme limits, as they venture daily into this now almost impassable road.
In February, a woman died while she was stranded on this deplorable road for two days. The woman, Patricia Joseph, known as ‘Patsy’ of West Indies Housing Scheme, Bartica, was then heading into the Puruni Landing, where she worked as a Cook, when the truck that she was travelling in, got stuck inside a ditch.
A post mortem conducted after the incident revealed that she died from ruptured arteries, which the Pathologist said could have been brought on by stress and fatigue.

Georgetown – The Leader of the Opposition will not be issuing nominations for the Macroeconomic or Investment committees under the Natural Resources Fund Act, government has been informed, as the Bill was debated after the passing of the no confidence motion.
“The Office of the Leader of the Opposition wishes to remind you that this activity which you seek to engage in, by inviting our nominations is unauthorized, outside of your constitutional mandate, and is not properly set in law,” Member of Parliament Juan Edghill wrote to Winston Jordan, the Minister of Finance.
Edghill referenced two correspondences addressed to Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo for the submission of nominees to sit on the Investment Committee and the Macroeconomic Committee that will be established under the Natural Resource Fund Act No. 12 of 2019.
He noted that the Bill was debated after the December 21, 2018 no confidence motion, through which the government “was defeated by a minority vote on a motion of no-confidence”.

“In essence, your government and you lost the mandate to pursue such actions as you did on January 3, 2019; you proceeded even against the best of advice and public pronouncements made,” Edghill stated, further noting that the subsequent decision by the Caribbean Court of Justice on June 18 validated that the motion was validly passed and that the provisions of Article 106 (6) and 106 (7) were “immediately engaged”.
He further reminded that the consequential orders issued by the CCJ state clearly that the President and his Cabinet stood resigned at the passage of the motion and all actions following such are in their capacity as a “caretaker” or “interim government” and so the issue at hand is outside of their remit.
“There can be no appointment of members of either the Macroeconomic Committee or the Investment Committee. As such, there will be no nominations from the Leader of the Opposition…It is our hope that your government and you will comply with the Constitution and adhere to the rulings of the CCJ, in all matters,” Edghill added.
On January 3, in the political limbo following the successful December 21 no-confidence vote against the government, the controversial Natural Resources Fund Bill 2018 was passed in the National Assembly with no objection as the Opposition side of the House was not present.
The bill, which will cater for funds from oil production in 2020, was passed with minor amendments during Jordan’s moving of the second and third readings of the bill. He stressed that a Public Accountability Oversight Committee – as catered for in the bill – would be appointed.
The PPP/C boycotted the sitting as it said the motion of no confidence meant that the government was prevented from taking any major initiatives in Parliament.

Immigration >