February 9, 2017 Source

A team of experts from the United Nations is here to consider how the constitutional reform process “could be realised”, according to a press release yesterday from the Office of the Prime Minister.

The APNU+AFC government has been pilloried for its sloth  on constitutional reform despite pre-election manifesto commitments of a speedy process. Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo has been entrusted with responsibility for constitutional reform.

The terms of reference (TOR) for the team’s visit includes examining the political environment here and the legal and institutional framework governing the constitutional reform process, according to the press release.

The team is expected to meet with various stakeholders including the Leader of the Opposition and the PPP/C, the Speaker of the National Assembly, trade unions, the Guyana Bar Association and the Private Sector Commission among others. Also on the list of bodies the team has requested to meet with are religious bodies and international partners and several civil society bodies.  The visit will wrap up tomorrow.

According to the press release, under the TOR between the Government of Guyana, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations Department of Political Affairs (UNDPA), the team will review past reform processes; evaluate the interest, capacity and roles of the various civil and political stakeholders in engaging in the constitutional reform process; and assess the potential role of UNDP-UNDPA in assisting the process and resources required.

The UNDP team comprises Gerardo Noto, Rohan Edrisinha and Jason Gluck all of whom are UN constitutional consultants.  UN Resident Coordinator Mikiko Tanaka and the Deputy Resident Coordinator Shabnam Mallick are also working with the mission team.

According to the press release, the Prime Minister during his 2017 budget presentation had indicated that the process of constitutional reform must forge ahead this year and that various partners including UNDP and UNICEF have assured assistance.

As a preparatory step, a Steering Committee on Constitutional Reform (SCCR) headed by attorney Nigel Hughes was set up on September 1st, 2015. The Committee’s report was submitted to the Prime Minister in April of last year and subsequently laid before Cabinet for studied discussions.

The release said that a Constitutional Reform Consultative Commission Bill was drafted and is now the subject of further Cabinet deliberations.

In November last year, constitutional expert, Professor Harold Lutchman and Senior Counsel Ralph Ramkarran had said that the coalition-led government and the opposition People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) do not appear to have any appetite for constitutional reform, with both sides historically wary of giving up presidential powers,

“What they support when they are in government is entirely different to what they support when they are out of government.  The same thing they criticize when they are out of power, the same thing when they are in power they don’t see anything wrong with,” Lutchman, who was a member of the SCCR, told Stabroek News in an interview.

 Echoed

His view was echoed by former speaker of the National Assembly and former PPP/C executive member Ramkarran who said that the APNU+AFC led coalition government was very slothful in getting the process started, although it would have been high on its manifesto priorities.

“It is clear that the government is dragging its feet on the constitutional reform process…the government is happy with the Constitution as it is. They have changed their minds now that they are in power and seem to now be comfortable,” he added.

When the APNU+AFC coalition won office in May 2015, the SCCR which was appointed by  Nagamootoo comprised attorneys Hughes, Gino Persaud and Geeta Chandan-Edmond, Lutchman and Haslyn Parris (who has since passed away).

The Prime Minister had explained that the remit of the committee was to give direction and scope within which the constitutional reform process should take place. He noted that the coalition parties had placed the issue of constitutional reform high on their agenda.

“We hope that the guidance contained in this report, which is the final report, would be able to give us both enough time and space in which we could achieve the… [changes] in our Constitution,” Nagamootoo had said in April of 2016, when the report was handed to him by Hughes.

However, to date, except for President David Granger saying, during the airing of his weekly ‘Public Interest’ programme, that proposals for constitutional reform should come from the people following widespread consultations, no information has been forthcoming from government.

President Granger in an  October, 2016  address to the National Assembly had also stated “[y]our Government is committed to good governance. It is committed to reforming the Constitution.  It will, in this regard, convene a Consultative Constitution Reform Commission in 2017.”In the 2016 SCCR report, the group stated that it saw the completion of the entire constitutional reform process within 18 months and recommended a reduction of immunities for the President, limiting the powers to prorogue or dissolve Parliament, and excluding the Attorney General from Cabinet so that the holder of that office remains unbiased and impartial.

Ramkarran said in November last year that it seems that excuses were being made as the President had the authority to direct the form the reform process consultations should take.

“The President had said that the people must give their views. There was an implied criticism with the (SCCR) report, to the fact that it contained nothing in its recommendations that the people will give their views. He was saying that he doesn’t want a constitutional reform process where people sit down in a room and write a Constitution for Guyana. The report did say that there would be consultations with the people, and even if the report were not to make that absolutely clear, the government in its decision on the process can make that clear.

They can tell them what they want. The process has to be agreed, so that he can say, and make it clear saying ‘This is what we want and this is process we are going to have.’ They need not delay the process because they can order that to happen,” he said.

“I think there is a deliberate effort to slow down constitutional reform and we have to keep pressing the issue. I do not think they will start the process unless public opinion is brought to bear on the matter, not only more but stronger opinion,” he added.