CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM SHOULD NOT BE ABOUT ENGINEERING REGIME CHANGE

December 16, 2014, By KNews, Filed Under Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom, Source - Kaieteur News

Constitutional reform has a vulgar history in Guyana. It has been far too much the preservation of political power rather than aimed at ensuring a sound system of governance values.

The PPP lost political office in 1964 after Jagan heroically sacrificed his political future just so that the country could be assured of independence. Against the wishes of his advisers, including Brindley Benn, Jagan decided at the Constitutional talks that preceded independence, to leave the decision about the country’s electoral system to the British government. It was a gamble that he took and the British exploited this to the hilt by imposing proportional representation.

With the United Force sewing up more than 10 per cent of the votes, it meant that the PPP even though it won a plurality, was outnumbered by the combined strength of the United Force and the People’s National Congress. Jagan was legislated out of power by the British.

When Burnham took over he soon ran the country into the ground and became politically isolated at home. Instead of holding elections as constitutionally due in 1978, Burnham opted for a Constitutional reform process that would turn him into an emperor. The 1980 Constitution created a number of vacuous supreme organs of democratic power. Real power resided in a powerful creature of the Constitution, the Executive Presidency. Burnham had used constitutional reform to expand his powers and create a virtual one- man, one party rule in the country.

Hoyte succeeded Burnham and when he lost to the PPP in the first free and fair elections in over twenty eight years, he accepted his defeat. But when he lost again to the wife of Jagan in 1997 the humiliation was too much. He became desperate realizing that he and his party would never see political office again. Street protests forced a process of political compromise that saw the PPP having to cut short its term (it eventually served out its full term) and agree to constitutional reform which was first called for by the Trade Union Congress (TUC). Instead of calling for the PNC to accept their defeat, the TUC called for constitutional reform.

The Constitutional Reform Process of 1998-2002 therefore, had its origins in an attempt to nudge the PPP out of office. The rules of the electoral system were changed to allow for a sixty-five seat legislature. Forty of the seats were chosen directly in relation to the proportion of votes received nationally while the remaining twenty five is allocated by geographic region. This new configuration has allowed for the majority held by the ruling party to be reduced. Even though the PPP won the elections in 2001, 2006 and 2011, its majority was reduced in 2001 and 2006. In 2011 the PPP won the most seats but not a majority.

Given these new electoral rules which were legislated under the 1998-2002 constitutional reform process, there was the inevitability of minority governments as happened in 2011. Constitutional reform between 1998 and 2002 had therefore opened an opportunity for the minority government and the possible defeat of the PPP. Guyanese have to accept that all future elections are going to result in either minority governments or very slim majority government. No party that wins a majority is likely to do so with more than four seats.

The opposition has failed to achieve any significant political objective through their one seat majority in the National Assembly. And the AFC has therefore decided that it is not satisfied with holding the balance of power. It wants to engineer regime change through constitutional reform. As such, it is not surprising that the AFC is proposing that the presidency be held by someone who enjoys majority support.

It is left to be seen whether this majority support will be majority support by the people or by the legislature.

The AFC is vulgarizing constitutional reform. The emphasis is on changing the electoral rules to allow the PPP to be removed from power. This is the sickening politics of a power-hungry opposition.

Constitutional reform cannot be about engineering political change. It cannot be about political power alone. It has to be about the relationship of the people to organs of the state. It has to be about the nature of the political and economic system and the closeness of the people to that process.

It has to widen the rights of citizens and provide a system to improve on the system of protecting fundamental human rights. And it has to strengthen the independence of key institutions of the State.

Source - http://www.kaieteurnewsonline....ering-regime-change/