"The AFC Leader disagreed with claims by the PPP that to give into President David Granger’s request that there should be a research centre for all of Guyana’s presidents would be to contaminate Jagan’s records by mixing them Arthur Chung, Forbes Burnham, Desmond Hoyte and Granger’s.

“So there is certain purity about Jagan and certain contamination about Burnham.

What is wrong with these people?

And look how they contaminate the appropriation of that,”

said the AFC Leader. “We are not going to be diverted or obfuscated by this attachment to legacy, of in my book of one of the greatest Guyanese ever. That is where the rules get bent, it is not the rule of lawyers it is the rule of law …We have to bring back law and order,” he added."

Tough question there Ramjattan.

AFC supports Granger’s rejection of nominees for Gecom chair-Ramjattan.

January 14, 2017 Source

The Alliance for Change (AFC) stands by President David Granger’s rejection of the six nominees submitted by Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo for the position of Chairperson of the Guyana Elections Commission (Gecom) and party leader Khemraj Ramjattan says the Head of State doesn’t have to give a reason.

“My understanding is that the six names [are] unacceptable and anything else he says is merely obiter [dicta]. Under the rules of the Constitution, all he has to tell them is that they are unacceptable and if he starts giving reasons, that because their beard is too long or their eyes are cockeyed like mine, that is alright, but it is not relevant. ‘I find them unacceptable’ and that is the end of the matter. He can go on and say he don’t like them because they don’t play cricket like him, is that relevant? …If he states anything further, it is probably just surplusage,” Ramjattan told a party press conference yesterday.

Following Granger’s rejection of his list of six nominees, Jagdeo wrote the president on Tuesday requesting clarity on his interpretation of the criteria for the office holder and proposed an urgent meeting.

Granger on Wednesday said that Jagdeo will be given the clarifications, while sources indicated that there would not be a meeting. He also emphasised that regardless of what obtained in the past, now that the responsibility has been vested in him as President of Guyana, the provisions of the Constitution will be followed.

Article 161 (2) of the Constitution states, “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 meaningful consultation with the non-governmental political parties represented in the National Assembly.”

While the president has highlighted the legal qualifications stipulated by the constitution, Jagdeo and the opposition PPP have noted that it also makes provision for other “fit and proper” candidates to be appointed.

Granger himself was nominated for the post under the same proviso by then Opposition Leader Desmond Hoyte, although he has since said that any breaches that may have occurred in the past must not be repeated.

‘No precedent’

“My understanding is that at all material times a member of the legal profession or several members of the legal profession were on the list but my acceptance of the nomination …does not necessarily mean that I must accept the six names that were submitted… So the point is, even if the Constitution had been breached, or a nomination been made in breach of the Constitution, 10 or 20 years ago, there is no need to repeat it… That’s not a precedent. I am accepting now as president that the constitutional provisions must be applied,” Granger posited on Wednesday.

Ramjattan was asked about the president’s assertions and if he thinks that it means that the constitution was breached before. He said that he does not interpret Granger to mean that.

“If that is what the president is saying, I didn’t interpret the president saying that, but if that is what he said, I disagree with him,” Ramjattan said.

He said that from all that has transpired between the two sides, he only understands that the president found the six nominees unacceptable and that the PPP/C was trying to twist Granger’s words to suit its own purposes.

“That is wholly constitutional. You go to a second list and if on the second list the president feels that that six other names is not acceptable, he could tell them that it is not acceptable and then he can proceed to name whosoever he wants on his own volition,” Ramjattan, himself an attorney, reasoned.

“There is absolutely no reason required for the president to give ‘Why I don’t want them six names,’ none, and no court of law can compel him to so do and the issue is non-justiciable.So all this nonsense Anil Nandlall is talking that he is going to take it to court and now Jagdeo jump on the bandwagon saying he will take it straight to CCJ, well you have to go High Court and Court of Appeal before you reach CCJ, if they don’t know. So don’t be impressed by that because it is a lot of nonsense. The whole point of it is that it is totally constitutional what the president is doing and that is how I understand what he is saying. They probably want to do a piece of mischief that it has to be a judge. I understand that the president has said that these are unacceptable names,” he added.

He said that it was “very fortuitous” that Jagdeo and the then leader of the opposition found favour in selecting someone from the first list submitted but that does not mean it has to be a precedent.

Meanwhile, as Jagdeo awaits a decision on a request by him for a meeting with the president to discuss the issue, Ramjattan said that he does not support such a meeting. “When the president went to the parliament to give a speech, was Bharrat Jagdeo there? Absolutely not, but he wants to come now and say ‘I want to meet’ and then says ‘if you don’t want meet you don’t want social cohesion.’ …That is what is so destructive,” he said.

Tough question or stupid question?  What is wrong with Supporting the Jagan legacy?

Django posted:

AFC supports Granger’s rejection of nominees for Gecom chair-Ramjattan.

January 14, 2017 Source

The Alliance for Change (AFC) stands by President David Granger’s rejection of the six nominees submitted by Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo for the position of Chairperson of the Guyana Elections Commission (Gecom) and party leader Khemraj Ramjattan says the Head of State doesn’t have to give a reason.

“My understanding is that the six names [are] unacceptable and anything else he says is merely obiter [dicta]. Under the rules of the Constitution, all he has to tell them is that they are unacceptable and if he starts giving reasons, that because their beard is too long or their eyes are cockeyed like mine, that is alright, but it is not relevant. ‘I find them unacceptable’ and that is the end of the matter. He can go on and say he don’t like them because they don’t play cricket like him, is that relevant? …If he states anything further, it is probably just surplusage,” Ramjattan told a party press conference yesterday.

Following Granger’s rejection of his list of six nominees, Jagdeo wrote the president on Tuesday requesting clarity on his interpretation of the criteria for the office holder and proposed an urgent meeting.

Granger on Wednesday said that Jagdeo will be given the clarifications, while sources indicated that there would not be a meeting. He also emphasised that regardless of what obtained in the past, now that the responsibility has been vested in him as President of Guyana, the provisions of the Constitution will be followed.

Article 161 (2) of the Constitution states, “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 meaningful consultation with the non-governmental political parties represented in the National Assembly.”

While the president has highlighted the legal qualifications stipulated by the constitution, Jagdeo and the opposition PPP have noted that it also makes provision for other “fit and proper” candidates to be appointed.

Granger himself was nominated for the post under the same proviso by then Opposition Leader Desmond Hoyte, although he has since said that any breaches that may have occurred in the past must not be repeated.

‘No precedent’

“My understanding is that at all material times a member of the legal profession or several members of the legal profession were on the list but my acceptance of the nomination …does not necessarily mean that I must accept the six names that were submitted… So the point is, even if the Constitution had been breached, or a nomination been made in breach of the Constitution, 10 or 20 years ago, there is no need to repeat it… That’s not a precedent. I am accepting now as president that the constitutional provisions must be applied,” Granger posited on Wednesday.

Ramjattan was asked about the president’s assertions and if he thinks that it means that the constitution was breached before. He said that he does not interpret Granger to mean that.

“If that is what the president is saying, I didn’t interpret the president saying that, but if that is what he said, I disagree with him,” Ramjattan said.

He said that from all that has transpired between the two sides, he only understands that the president found the six nominees unacceptable and that the PPP/C was trying to twist Granger’s words to suit its own purposes.

“That is wholly constitutional. You go to a second list and if on the second list the president feels that that six other names is not acceptable, he could tell them that it is not acceptable and then he can proceed to name whosoever he wants on his own volition,” Ramjattan, himself an attorney, reasoned.

“There is absolutely no reason required for the president to give ‘Why I don’t want them six names,’ none, and no court of law can compel him to so do and the issue is non-justiciable.So all this nonsense Anil Nandlall is talking that he is going to take it to court and now Jagdeo jump on the bandwagon saying he will take it straight to CCJ, well you have to go High Court and Court of Appeal before you reach CCJ, if they don’t know. So don’t be impressed by that because it is a lot of nonsense. The whole point of it is that it is totally constitutional what the president is doing and that is how I understand what he is saying. They probably want to do a piece of mischief that it has to be a judge. I understand that the president has said that these are unacceptable names,” he added.

He said that it was “very fortuitous” that Jagdeo and the then leader of the opposition found favour in selecting someone from the first list submitted but that does not mean it has to be a precedent.

Meanwhile, as Jagdeo awaits a decision on a request by him for a meeting with the president to discuss the issue, Ramjattan said that he does not support such a meeting. “When the president went to the parliament to give a speech, was Bharrat Jagdeo there? Absolutely not, but he wants to come now and say ‘I want to meet’ and then says ‘if you don’t want meet you don’t want social cohesion.’ …That is what is so destructive,” he said.

Was it necessary to copy and paste the entire article without even making a comment??  

Django posted:

"The AFC Leader disagreed with claims by the PPP that to give into President David Granger’s request that there should be a research centre for all of Guyana’s presidents would be to contaminate Jagan’s records by mixing them Arthur Chung, Forbes Burnham, Desmond Hoyte and Granger’s.

“So there is certain purity about Jagan and certain contamination about Burnham.

What is wrong with these people?

And look how they contaminate the appropriation of that,”

said the AFC Leader. “We are not going to be diverted or obfuscated by this attachment to legacy, of in my book of one of the greatest Guyanese ever. That is where the rules get bent, it is not the rule of lawyers it is the rule of law …We have to bring back law and order,” he added."

---

 

Tough question there Ramjattan.

Although I am a supporter of PPP I disagree what they did with Red House . You cannot take a state own building and give to a single political party. 

I know Burnham did this - but when do you stop.

Burnham did lots of good stuff also .

all the past presidents history should be posted there 

the past ppp ministers should donate 10% of their illegal earnings and build a roof for their boss 

When Runjat speak - I feel like vomiting.. this scoundrel should blow Chief pipe ... if Chief has any left after the circumcision 

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Tough question or stupid question?  What is wrong with Supporting the Jagan legacy?

Nothing wrong,

do it the legal way,

don't squat and use State Property because he lived there for 3 yrs.

Jagan would have never allowed using State Property to memorize his name.

Bhai Imran,

What you got against Chief,

I was gonna like your post,when i reach the last sentence

change my mind.

So why did Hoyte and Burnham get their own museum?  Why can't Jagan get his own?  Why does he have to share with the other Presidents? Volda Lawrence just open up the Hoyte museum.  I have no problem with that because was a President.  No one in the PPP opposed the recently opened Hoyte museum.  

Burnham's former home on Vlissengen Road now called Castellani House is the Burnham museum.  In addition to that Jagdeo gave the land surrounding the property all the way to Botanic garden to the Burnham family.  His daughter recently sold the land for $200 million and tek the money and gone!

Bibi Haniffa posted:

So why did Hoyte and Burnham get their own museum?  Why can't Jagan get his own?  Why does he have to share with the other Presidents? Volda Lawrence just open up theHoyte museum.  I have no problem with that because was a President.  No one in the PPP opposed the recently opened Hoyte museum.  

Burhnham gat waan where??

Hoyte musuem is at his own residence.

made it big suh you can see.

The PPP can't opposed,no State Property was used.

Django posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

So why did Hoyte and Burnham get their own museum?  Why can't Jagan get his own?  Why does he have to share with the other Presidents? Volda Lawrence just open up theHoyte museum.  I have no problem with that because was a President.  No one in the PPP opposed the recently opened Hoyte museum.  

Burhnham gat waan where??

Hoyte musuem is at his own residence.

made it big suh you can see.

Read what I said above!!!  

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Burnham's former home on Vlissengen Road now called Castellani House is the Burnham museum.  In addition to that Jagdeo gave the land surrounding the property all the way to Botanic garden to the Burnham family.  His daughter recently sold the land for $200 million and tek the money and gone!

Django please read this!!

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Burnham's former home on Vlissengen Road now called Castellani House is the Burnham museum.  In addition to that Jagdeo gave the land surrounding the property all the way to Botanic garden to the Burnham family.  His daughter recently sold the land for $200 million and tek the money and gone!

Django please read this!!

Damn i forget that house,well i don't remember much of him,the good he did was erased by the bad things he has done to the people in his latter stage of governance.

The land that was given to Burnham family does not justify squatting on State Property.

Now you see the past presidents residences are used,but papa Cheddi is special and lived in Red House for 3yrs,so it's deserved for his museum to be there,

I am saying it again,he would have never agreed to that.

All the PPP is asking is for them to renew the lease.  They don't want to own the house.  No one is contending that it's State property.  That is a fact.  

Bibi Haniffa posted:

All the PPP is asking is for them to renew the lease.  They don't want to own the house.  No one is contending that it's State property.  That is a fact.  

I disagree let the PPP find somewhere else,they can expand on Jagan House,I am sure they will get donations.

Django posted:

Bhai Imran,

What you got against Chief,

I was gonna like your post,when i reach the last sentence

change my mind.

Just fooling around with he old cranky rass 

Imran posted:

Django posted:

Bhai Imran,

What you got against Chief,

I was gonna like your post,when i reach the last sentence

change my mind.

Just fooling around with he old cranky rass 

Take it light.

Go and tell that to Joey.  He is in charge of the Jagan house in Bel Air but he is too wrapped up with the PNC to come up with such an idea.  That land in Bel Air was once the property of my great grandparents.  We sold it to Cheddi when Burnham kicked him out. 

Django posted:

Imran posted:

Django posted:

Bhai Imran,

What you got against Chief,

I was gonna like your post,when i reach the last sentence

change my mind.

Just fooling around with he old cranky rass 

Take it light.

Hey I would have that info for you next week. 

I have someone going into Enmore next week and will visit his son .

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Go and tell that to Joey.  He is in charge of the Jagan house in Bel Air but he is too wrapped up with the PNC to come up with such an idea.  That land in Bel Air was once the property of my great grandparents.  We sold it to Cheddi when Burnham kicked him out. 

Bibi - my understanding of that land was PPP supporters bought the land for Cheddi

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Go and tell that to Joey.  He is in charge of the Jagan house in Bel Air but he is too wrapped up with the PNC to come up with such an idea.  That land in Bel Air was once the property of my great grandparents.  We sold it to Cheddi when Burnham kicked him out. 

Suh the party want a museum,and papa Cheddi house is also part of his memory controlled by Joey.

Looks like jhanjat.

Let the party set up the museum in Freedom House.

Parties don't set up museums, governments do.  Castellani House was established under the PPP Gov't.  But if Jagdeo had done the same for Red House y'all would be crying out how the PPP watching out for their own.  

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Parties don't set up museums, governments do.  Castellani House was established under the PPP Gov't.  But if Jagdeo had done the same for Red House y'all would be crying out how the PPP watching out for their own.  

You sure about that ?

or is't National Archives and Private Foundations ?

Well the truth is anyone can set up anything.  In the case of Presidential libraries and museums the Gov't usually set it up.  

Imran posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Go and tell that to Joey.  He is in charge of the Jagan house in Bel Air but he is too wrapped up with the PNC to come up with such an idea.  That land in Bel Air was once the property of my great grandparents.  We sold it to Cheddi when Burnham kicked him out. 

Bibi - my understanding of that land was PPP supporters bought the land for Cheddi

I think you might be correct.  It was sold for VERY little to them and others in the party may have contributed.  

The AFC has no balls.  They are a bunch of cowards.  Ramjattan and Nagamootoo were part of the PPP under Jagan, why would they sit by and support the racist PNC trying to erase Jagan's legacy!

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Go and tell that to Joey.  He is in charge of the Jagan house in Bel Air but he is too wrapped up with the PNC to come up with such an idea.  That land in Bel Air was once the property of my great grandparents.  We sold it to Cheddi when Burnham kicked him out. 

So you related to Ramkarran?

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Well the truth is anyone can set up anything.  In the case of Presidential libraries and museums the Gov't usually set it up.  

"How is a Presidential Library paid for and funded?

A Presidential Library is constructed with private or non-Federal funds donated to non-profit organizations established usually for the express purpose of building a Presidential Library and supporting its programs.

Some Libraries have also received construction and development funding from state and/or local governments.

The Library is then transferred to the Federal government and operated and maintained by NARA through its congressionally appropriated operating budget.

Some staff and programs at Presidential Libraries are paid for with funds from associated private foundations organized to fund the construction of the Library. These private foundations also provide continuing support for Library programs and special events, such as conferences and exhibitions."

https://www.archives.gov/presi...ries/about/faqs.html

Bibi,

You too RED,here how it's done in ole USA.

Django posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Tough question or stupid question?  What is wrong with Supporting the Jagan legacy?

Nothing wrong,

do it the legal way,

don't squat and use State Property because he lived there for 3 yrs.

Jagan would have never allowed using State Property to memorize his name.

You are a shallow individual.  It's not what it meant to Jagan, but what it means to his legacy in the eyes of his people.  Compromises are made everyday in the name of unity and respect.  Not everything needs to be hard-coded for a decision.  Leaders seize the moment to demonstrate an ideal and a thinking they want to cultivate.

Take a leaf from Mandela and Gandhi books on how a forge a new direction, shift the paradigm and gain respect while doing so.  Brute force and the blind application of legal codes are not a demonstration of strength, but rather weakness!

TALK ABOUT SHAMELESS NAMAKARAM CRABDAAGS!! I AM NOT ONE BIT SURPRISE AT THAT ASS KISSING PARASITE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bibi Haniffa posted:

So why did Hoyte and Burnham get their own museum?  Why can't Jagan get his own?  Why does he have to share with the other Presidents? Volda Lawrence just open up the Hoyte museum.  I have no problem with that because was a President.  No one in the PPP opposed the recently opened Hoyte museum.  

The Hoyte museum is built in the house owned by Hoyte when he was alive. A modest home on North Road. The Red House is state property which the PPP illegally misappropriated. You must be rather dense if you can't see the difference.

there is no such thing as Burnham Museum. Castellani House is a public museum which has no ties to Burnham. I went to a photographic exhibition there recently. What nonsense are you peddling?

ba$eman posted:

Django posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Tough question or stupid question?  What is wrong with Supporting the Jagan legacy?

Nothing wrong,

do it the legal way,

don't squat and use State Property because he lived there for 3 yrs.

Jagan would have never allowed using State Property to memorize his name.

You are a shallow individual.  It's not what it meant to Jagan, but what it means to his legacy in the eyes of his people.  Compromises are made everyday in the name of unity and respect.  Not everything needs to be hard-coded for a decision.  Leaders seize the moment to demonstrate an ideal and a thinking they want to cultivate.

Take a leaf from Mandela and Gandhi books on how a forge a new direction, shift the paradigm and gain respect while doing so.  Brute force and the blind application of legal codes are not a demonstration of strength, but rather weakness!

Here is where i differ from you,Guyana is ethnically divided country and there should be no priority given to past leaders library or museum,let it be level playing field.

Ramjattan has no choice. He cannot speak without the permission of Joe Harmon. If he speaks without permission, he will get a wrong side bitch slap. Poor Prak, he fetch trouble from bush and bring it home.

Mars posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

So why did Hoyte and Burnham get their own museum?  Why can't Jagan get his own?  Why does he have to share with the other Presidents? Volda Lawrence just open up the Hoyte museum.  I have no problem with that because was a President.  No one in the PPP opposed the recently opened Hoyte museum.  

The Hoyte museum is built in the house owned by Hoyte when he was alive. A modest home on North Road. The Red House is state property which the PPP illegally misappropriated. You must be rather dense if you can't see the difference.

there is no such thing as Burnham Museum. Castellani House is a public museum which has no ties to Burnham. I went to a photographic exhibition there recently. What nonsense are you peddling?

Thanks,for clearing this up.

Castellani House is the home of Burnham's residence on Vlissengen Road.  I think every President of Guyana should have a museum - good, bad, or otherwise. It's a part of Guyanese history and future generations need to know who these people were.

Django posted:

ba$eman posted:

Django posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Tough question or stupid question?  What is wrong with Supporting the Jagan legacy?

Nothing wrong,

do it the legal way,

don't squat and use State Property because he lived there for 3 yrs.

Jagan would have never allowed using State Property to memorize his name.

You are a shallow individual.  It's not what it meant to Jagan, but what it means to his legacy in the eyes of his people.  Compromises are made everyday in the name of unity and respect.  Not everything needs to be hard-coded for a decision.  Leaders seize the moment to demonstrate an ideal and a thinking they want to cultivate.

Take a leaf from Mandela and Gandhi books on how a forge a new direction, shift the paradigm and gain respect while doing so.  Brute force and the blind application of legal codes are not a demonstration of strength, but rather weakness!

Here is where i differ from you,Guyana is ethnically divided country and there should be no priority given to past leaders library or museum,let it be level playing field.

It is these moments where you confirm your shallowness.  So each new Admin believes in leveling, well that is why Guyana has been leveled.  If Mandela and Gandhi believed in "leveling the field", their societies would be as dysfunctional and disunited as Guyana is today.

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Go and tell that to Joey.  He is in charge of the Jagan house in Bel Air but he is too wrapped up with the PNC to come up with such an idea.  That land in Bel Air was once the property of my great grandparents.  We sold it to Cheddi when Burnham kicked him out. 

Bibi Haniffa, Joey already thank Rankaran and he daddy for selling the land to the Jagans at cost. So get over it. Rankaran also played a big part in the rule of the anti-koolie squad over East Indian brothers and sisters. So deal with it.

Legal or not, I would be surprised if Ramjattan (as well as Moses) ever disagree with anything Granger or Harmon say/do.

ba$eman posted:

 

You are a shallow individual.  It's not what it meant to Jagan, but what it means to his legacy in the eyes of his people.  Compromises are made everyday in the name of unity and respect.  Not everything needs to be hard-coded for a decision.  Leaders seize the moment to demonstrate an ideal and a thinking they want to cultivate.

Take a leaf from Mandela and Gandhi books on how a forge a new direction, shift the paradigm and gain respect while doing so.  Brute force and the blind application of legal codes are not a demonstration of strength, but rather weakness!

Here is where i differ from you,Guyana is ethnically divided country and there should be no priority given to past leaders library or museum,let it be level playing field.

It is these moments where you confirm your shallowness.  So each new Admin believes in leveling, well that is why Guyana has been leveled.  If Mandela and Gandhi believed in "leveling the field", their societies would be as dysfunctional and disunited as Guyana is today.

You should have told your hero about the two honorable gentlemen philosophy,he would have learn a thing or two about expropriate.

Disunity is created by East Indian divisonist who think East Indians have more entitlement than the rest of the people,all of that is coming to an end soon,thier percentage is decreasing they are merely 10% above Africans,the mixed are increasing,advise your hero he will be in the opposition for a while "Coolie Party"will not cut the mustard.