Skip to main content

October 29,2017

Source

Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo had a duty and responsibility to “shape” the three lists of nominees for the post of Guyana Elections Commission (Gecom) Chairman to limit President David Granger’s choices, his legal advisor Anil Nandlall said last evening.

“This is so because the president has no unilateral power of appointment. His power of appointment is constrained to the names submitted to him by Jagdeo. That is precisely what is contemplated by the Carter/Price formula and Article 161 (2) of the Constitution,” Nandlall, a PPP/C Member of Parliament and the former attorney-general insisted.

He was responding to a report published in yesterday’s edition of the Stabroek News under the headline “Jagdeo shaped Gecom lists to limit President’s choice,” which was based on comments made by Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo and Attorney General Basil Williams SC during a televised interview last Thursday.

Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo

Williams asserted that Jagdeo gave flawed lists to get the desired chairman he favoured.

“The lists were designed in such a way to focus the president on a particular candidate that Mr Jagdeo desired from the very first list,” he said.

“Mr Jagdeo has been putting names on the list that he knows doesn’t qualify under the criteria because a lot of them can be accused of being friends and so on… the president could not select a person who is the friend of the leader of the opposition, a member of his party etc. Mr Jagdeo dragging out the President since December, 2016 and then he was abusing the president, saying he wasn’t fit and proper because he didn’t submit someone from the list,” he added.

“After three lists that were not properly composed by the opposition leader, deliberately so, the president, as part of the process, had to resort to the proviso otherwise we would not have had a chairman of Gecom,” Williams said.

President David Granger

But Nandlall told this newspaper that the Carter/Price formula was intentionally designed and Article 161 (2) of the Constitution was deliberately structured to authorise the Leader of the Opposition to select six names from which the president is empowered to choose one for the appointment of a chairperson of Gecom. “Simply put, what this means is that the president’s power to appoint a chairperson… is circumscribed, confined and limited to the names submitted to him by the leader of the opposition. He has no power to appoint outside of those names when such a list is presented to him by the leader of the opposition. It is only when the leader of the opposition fails to submit a list that the president can appoint a person of his own choosing,” he added.

In this regard, he pointed out, that Nagamootoo and Williams are both correct in their sentiments that Jagdeo “shaped” the lists. “The truth of the matter is that it is Mr. Jagdeo’s responsibility, if not duty, to ‘shape Gecom lists to limit the president’s choice,’” he added.

Nandlall stated that he has explained elaborately already that the names submitted to the president by Jagdeo must not necessarily be acceptable to the President but be in keeping with the constitution, which requires them to be not unacceptable to the president. Further, he said it is not every name on that list which must meet this requirement. “It is only one of the six names. The constitution, therefore, gave the president six options. In this case, by rejecting three sets of names, the president had eighteen options,” Nandlall stressed.

He told Sunday Stabroek that the point he wishes to emphasise is that the constitution does not permit the president to have his perfect candidate. “This is so because it is a bipartisan process involving his political rival,” he said, while adding that this fundamental point is simply lost upon those who mindlessly seek to defend the indefensible appointment by the President.

Retired judge James Patterson, 84, was unilaterally appointed by Granger ten days ago and the move has been condemned by the opposition and sections of civil society. Patterson was not among the persons nominated by Jagdeo.

Nandlall, on behalf of the PPP/C, has since filed a court action challenging the appointment and calling on the court to order Granger to make a selection from the 18 names.

According to Nandlall, the appointments made by presidents under the PPP/C administrations to the office of chairman of Gecom from lists submitted by leaders of the opposition in the past were not “perfect names for those presidents either.” He said that this is what the constitution prescribes and that Nagamootoo knows this. “He [Nagamootoo] was in the executive of the PPP and would have contributed to the selection of the chairman of Gecom on every one of those occasions,” he said.

Nandlall pointed out that the matter of choosing the Gecom chairman has “heavy political undercurrents,” and therefore a leader of the opposition will naturally try to compile a list that he is comfortable with and whom he reasonably expects the president to be comfortable with.

During the televised interview, Nagamootoo had mention that Dr James Rose, who has ties to the PPP, was included in Jagdeo’s first list.

“I am not here dealing with names and I don’t intend to get into all of that. I am dealing with politics… James Rose had been a candidate of the PPP. I had been in the PPP at a time when we were looking for someone to be the Prime Ministerial candidate for the 1990 elections, which was held in 1992. Dr James had been approached. Dr. James Rose was one of those that was approached and we indicated it to him that Dr [Cheddi] Jagan wanted him to run with him. If you came and you put James Rose, it meant that you felt that you can leverage an advantage in a list that is required by law,” Nagamootoo noted.

Nandlall, in response, told this newspaper that while Nagamootoo is making a fuss over Dr. Rose, he is only one of six names and the president had five other choices. “All the arguments that he advances in relation to James Rose, I can advance, with greater force, in relation to David Granger, whose name appeared on two lists submitted by Mr. Desmond Hoyte. Mr. Granger was so deep in the belly of the beast that he went on to become the leader of the PNC and is today the president. That is why, of all the persons, Mr David Granger should be the first one to understand how Article 161 (2) is expected to work,” he said,

Nandlall stressed that Nagamootoo would have been part of a PPP executive that rejected the name of David Granger twice. “He should now explain why he did so,” he said.

Replies sorted oldest to newest

That "shape the list" comment will hurt the PPP in court.  Even though it was a tactic Nandall should not have admitted it.

In theory reasonable effort should be made to present 6 viable names.  You cannot legally argue that you knew 5 names were unacceptable therefore forcing the choice of the sixth person.

FM

All this GECOM stuff is simply BS on PNC part. Too much talking by Nandlall makes him a dull boy and will cause PPP to lose the court battle. The PPP strength is in their mouth and BT. They feeding right into the alligator mouth. 

FM

That article in the constitution is quite ambiguous giving strength to mamy opposing arguments. That said, Nandlall needs to allow Jagdeo to speak for himself. Jagdeo does not strike anyone as shy and unable to speak for himself.

FM

Of Note:

"Nandlall stressed that Nagamootoo would have been part of a PPP executive that rejected the name of David Granger twice. “He should now explain why he did so,” he said."

 
FM
yuji22 posted:

Of Note:

"Nandlall stressed that Nagamootoo would have been part of a PPP executive that rejected the name of David Granger twice. “He should now explain why he did so,” he said."

 

Only an Indian politician would think another Indian needs to explain himself, now that Nagamootoo is no longer with the PPP. Black politicians behave more maturely and leave the pettiness for Indians to fight over. Even if maturity means bullying, I find it appealing over stupidness. No wonder Guyana can never get a breath of fresh air. 

 

FM
ksazma posted:

That article in the constitution is quite ambiguous giving strength to mamy opposing arguments. That said, Nandlall needs to allow Jagdeo to speak for himself. Jagdeo does not strike anyone as shy and unable to speak for himself.

The constitution is abundantly clear on the presentation and selection of a name for GECOM chairman.

1. Opposition Leader presents the names.

2. President selects one person from the list.

Of note ...

Only when the Opposition Leader DOES NOT submit a list, the President has the unilateral option to select someone of his choice.

Since the Carter formula in 2000, the Opposition Leader submits a list of candidates and the President selects one.

FM

Suggestions that the proviso to article 161(2) is only triggered when a list is misleading.

Source

October 29,2017

Dear Editor,
Now that the President has appointed a Chairman of the Elections Commission and despite the partisan and emotional outbursts, agreements and disagreements, the only question that falls to be considered is: Did the President act in accordance with the proviso to Article 161(2) of the Constitution of Guyana? The short answer is yes for the following reasons.
The proviso to Article 161 (2) of the Constitution of Guyana states “Provided that if the Leader of the Opposition fails to submit a list as provided for, the President shall appoint a person who holds or has held office as a judge of a court having unlimited jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters…” to be the Chairman. In order to answer whether the President has acted in accordance with the proviso to Article 161 (2) of the Constitution of Guyana, we need to determine what is meant by the phrase “…if the Leader of the Opposition fails to submit a list as provided for…” and more particularly the phrase “…a list as provided for…”since a list was provided. However, was that list “…a list as provided for…” under Article 161(2).
The phrase”…a list as provided for…”under Art 161(2) of the Constitution of Guyanais explained by the substantive provision of Article 161(2). The substantive provision of Article 161(2) provides for two categories of persons that can be appointed: (1) judges of various jurisdictions and (2) persons who are ‘fit and proper’”…to be appointed from a list of six persons not unacceptable to the President…”Therefore the phrase “…a list as provided for…”means a list of six persons not unacceptable to the President and not the absence of a list being presented to the President. It is also important to note, therefore, that there is no such category as ‘a list’ not being submitted as suggested by some commentators. It is respectfully submitted that it is the failure of the Leader of the Opposition to submit a list not unacceptable to the President that triggered the operation of the proviso to Art 161(2).
In terms of the qualities of the Chairman, we do have the benefit of statutory interpretation, which guides us to understand that wide ‘words of the same kind’ in the text following ‘more limited words’ are taken to be restricted by implication to matters of the same genus. In Art 161(2) the word ‘Judge’ created its own genus and the words ‘any other fit and proper person’ belong to that genus. It is therefore submitted that the phrase”…a list as provided for…” according to Article 161 (2),also means a list of six persons who possess judge like qualities, who may be in the category of judge as per Article 161(2) and/or the category of a fit and proper person. These judge like qualities, though universal, can be found at Art 122 of the Constitution of Guyana which translates into acting independently of the control and direction of any other person or authority; acting free and independent from political executive and other forms of direction and control; and exercising impartiality and fairness. I submit that these judge like qualities are the exact requirements, to say the least, of the category ‘any other fit and proper person.’
The confusion of many commentators on this issue may well be that they have ascribed the term ‘any other fit and proper person’ to the character of the persons on the lists and not to category of persons giving rise to emotional responses.
Further, it is the President who determines in his own deliberate judgment if the list is acceptable or unacceptable, once submitted. That is a subjective matter and the issue of it being non-justiciable may well arise since Article 111 (1) compels the President to act in his own deliberate judgment in the exercise of his functions except where he is required to act on advice of any person or authority, which is not the case in relation to appointing a Chairman of the Elections Commission.
Applying the law to the facts, in this case, shows that the Leader of the Opposition submitted a list that was deemed unacceptable by the President in accordance with the Constitution of Guyana, meaning that the Leader of the Opposition failed to “…submit a list as was provided for…”under Article 161 (2), which in turn triggered the President’s decision to apply the proviso to Article 161(2) of the Constitution of Guyana and appoint a person within the judge category. Applying the proviso to Art 161(2) of the Guyana Constitution also extinguishes the use of ‘any other fit and proper person’ category from consideration and directs the President to appoint from the category of judge. This decision, in no way, casts any aspersions against the names submitted. This decision is about not using the‘any other fit and proper person’ category.
It is important to recognize that Article 161(2) creates a bridge between the Judiciary and the Executive as it relates to the Elections Commission and its independence of the Executive Branch. Even though appointed by the Executive, ‘any other fit and proper person’ or a person within the category of judge may well occupy that bridge. Most importantly, however, is the fact that in cases of a resort to the proviso, as in this case, Article 161 (2) of the Guyana Constitution provides for the Executive Branch to appoint a person from the Judicial Branch or a person who had served in the Judicial Branch, no doubt, with intention of capturing the qualities of independence and impartiality that reside in judge like persons and persons who are fit and proper.
In this context, terms such as ‘unilateral appointment’ and the view that the proviso can only be triggered if ‘no list’ is submitted are simply misleading. It is of no moment what type of extra constitutional agreement or agreements, the President and the Leader of the Opposition made, since we are guided by findings of the Esther Pereira case which stated, among others, that Parliamentarians cannot come together and break the law. Applying that same reasoning to this matter translates into politicians cannot come together and make agreements outside the four corners of the Constitution of Guyana no matter how noble their intentions. Harsh as it may seem, the Constitution must stand and be tested if necessary.
Gary A R Best
Rear Admiral (rtd)
Attorney-at-Law

Django
Django posted:

Suggestions that the proviso to article 161(2) is only triggered when a list is misleading.

Source

October 29,2017

Dear Editor,
The proviso to Article 161 (2) of the Constitution of Guyana states “Provided that if the Leader of the Opposition fails to submit a list as provided for, the President shall appoint a person who holds or has held office as a judge of a court having unlimited jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters…” to be the Chairman.

Gary A R Best
Rear Admiral (rtd)
Attorney-at-Law

Leader of the Opposition submitted three separate lists.

Despite the lists, President unilaterally appointed GECOM chairman.

Of note ... Leader of the Opposition never failed to submit a list.

FM
Demerara_Guy posted:
Django posted:

Suggestions that the proviso to article 161(2) is only triggered when a list is misleading.

Source

October 29,2017

Dear Editor,
The proviso to Article 161 (2) of the Constitution of Guyana states “Provided that if the Leader of the Opposition fails to submit a list as provided for, the President shall appoint a person who holds or has held office as a judge of a court having unlimited jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters…” to be the Chairman.

Gary A R Best
Rear Admiral (rtd)
Attorney-at-Law

Leader of the Opposition submitted three separate lists.

Despite the lists, President unilaterally appointed GECOM chairman.

Of note ... Leader of the Opposition never failed to submit a list.

Suggestions that the proviso to article 161(2) is only triggered when a list is misleading.

Source

October 29,2017

Dear Editor,

President has acted in accordance with the proviso to Article 161 (2) of the Constitution of Guyana, we need to determine what is meant by the phrase “…if the Leader of the Opposition fails to submit a list as provided for…” and more particularly the phrase “…a list as provided for…”since a list was provided. However, was that list “…a list as provided for…” under Article 161(2).

The phrase”…a list as provided for…”under Art 161(2) of the Constitution of Guyana is explained by the substantive provision of Article 161(2).

The substantive provision of Article 161(2) provides for two categories of persons that can be appointed: (1) judges of various jurisdictions and (2) persons who are ‘fit and proper’”…to be appointed from a list of six persons not unacceptable to the President…”Therefore the phrase “…a list as provided for…”means a list of six persons not unacceptable to the President and not the absence of a list being presented to the President. It is also important to note, therefore, that there is no such category as ‘a list’ not being submitted as suggested by some commentators.

It is respectfully submitted that it is the failure of the Leader of the Opposition to submit a list not unacceptable to the President that triggered the operation of the proviso to Art 161(2)

Gary A R Best
Rear Admiral (rtd)
Attorney-at-Law

Django

The English language is much more difficult than we think. Here we have paragraphs that mean x to one group while to the next it means y. Then there are wordings such as; "a list of six persons "not unacceptable" to the President". Is it not easier to read/say "a list of six persons "acceptable" to the President?"

cain

Everyone is taking turns to interpret the constitution to their belief. Only the guardian of the constitution which is the appeals court has the final say, if the supreme court rejects Jagdeo's injunction. 

FM

One can make varied explanations, but the fundamental point in this case is extremely clear, as per the laws of Guyana and has been the process since 2000.

Leader of the Opposition never failed to submit a list of candidates.

Laws of Guyana

Source

http://www.oas.org/juridico/sp...guy_constitution.pdf

[[Quote]]

161 (1) There shall be an Elections Commission for Guyana consisting
of a Chairman, who shall be a fulltime Chairman and shall not engage
in any other form of employment, and such other members as may be
appointed in accordance with the provisions of this article.
 
(2) Subject to the provisions of paragraph (4), the Chairman of
the Elections Commission shall be a person who holds or who has held
office as a judge of a court having unlimited jurisdiction in civil and
criminal matters in some part of the Commonwealth or a court having
jurisdiction in appeals from any such court or who is qualified to be
appointed as any such judge, or any other fit and proper person, to be
appointed by the President from a list of six persons, not unacceptable
to the President, submitted by the Leader of the Opposition after
meaninful consultatal political parties represented in the National
assembly.
Provided that if the Leader of the Opposition fails to submit a list as
provided for, the President shall appoint a person who holds or has
held office as a judge of a court having unlimited jurisdiction in civil and
criminal matters in some part of the Commonwealth or a court having
jurisdiction in appeals from any such court or who is qualified to be
appointed as any such judge

 

[[Unquote]]

Paragraph (4) renders an alien ineligible to be GECOM Chairman.

FM
Last edited by Former Member

It is this way, Cain ...

1. Opposition Leader submits a list of candidates.

2. President considers and selects one from the list as GECOM Chairman.

3. President can ONLY unilaterally appoint a Chairman when the Opposition Leader DOES NOT submit a list of candidates.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
cain posted:

The English language is much more difficult than we think. Here we have paragraphs that mean x to one group while to the next it means y. Then there are wordings such as; "a list of six persons "not unacceptable" to the President". Is it not easier to read/say "a list of six persons "acceptable" to the President?"

The Guyana Constitution was composed in 19th century legal terminology and long sentences resembling mazes in a cornfield. Just like many outdated laws the courts are guided by. No layman or non-legal professional can fully understand those documents.

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Demerara_Guy posted:

It is this way, Cain ...

1. Opposition Leader submits a list of candidates.

2. President considers and selects one from the list as GECOM Chairman.

3. President can ONLY unilaterally appoint a Chairman when the Opposition Leader DOES NOT submit a list of candidates.

Where is no. 3 stated in the Constitution DG?  And how do you interpret the " not unacceptable" part?

FM
VVP posted:
Demerara_Guy posted:

It is this way, Cain ...

1. Opposition Leader submits a list of candidates.

2. President considers and selects one from the list as GECOM Chairman.

3. President can ONLY unilaterally appoint a Chairman when the Opposition Leader DOES NOT submit a list of candidates.

Where is no. 3 stated in the Constitution DG?  And how do you interpret the " not unacceptable" part?

Saw that,knowing DG tough to get a straight answer.

Django
VVP posted:
Demerara_Guy posted:

It is this way, Cain ...

1. Opposition Leader submits a list of candidates.

2. President considers and selects one from the list as GECOM Chairman.

3. President can ONLY unilaterally appoint a Chairman when the Opposition Leader DOES NOT submit a list of candidates.

Where is no. 3 stated in the Constitution DG?

 And how do you interpret the " not unacceptable" part?

Clause 2, of section 161 of the constitution; which is referenced above.

Yet again ...

1. If the submitted candidates are not acceptable, the Opposition Leader can submit another list; which he did.

2. If the Opposition Leader fails to submit a list of candidates, then the president has the absolute right to name a person of his choice.

The mentioned explanations are clearly presented in the constitution.

FM
Demerara_Guy posted:
VVP posted:
Demerara_Guy posted:

It is this way, Cain ...

1. Opposition Leader submits a list of candidates.

2. President considers and selects one from the list as GECOM Chairman.

3. President can ONLY unilaterally appoint a Chairman when the Opposition Leader DOES NOT submit a list of candidates.

Where is no. 3 stated in the Constitution DG?

 And how do you interpret the " not unacceptable" part?

Clause 2, of section 161 of the constitution; which is referenced above.

Yet again ...

1. If the submitted candidates are not acceptable, the Opposition Leader can submit another list; which he did.

2. If the Opposition Leader fails to submit a list of candidates, then the president has the absolute right to name a person of his choice.

The mentioned explanations are clearly presented in the constitution.

Disingenuous _Guy is making it up as he goes along. 

Mitwah

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×