What does Granger mean when he tells PNC Congress that the party's Constitution is our supreme law?
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Nehru, put down the bottle and correct the title. 
Granger is the next supreme leader of North Korea Guyana.
Bhai, I thought you said you were going to have a nice Sunday. Come you rass down Library leh we drink some mannish water.
Cobra posted:Granger is the next supreme leader of North Korea Guyana.
Bhai, I thought you said you were going to have a nice Sunday. Come you rass down Library leh we drink some mannish water.
Punani comes with the manish wata???
Say hello to Sarah at good Hope for me, she is real hot.
Nehru posted:Cobra posted:Granger is the next supreme leader of North Korea Guyana.
Bhai, I thought you said you were going to have a nice Sunday. Come you rass down Library leh we drink some mannish water.
Punani comes with the manish wata???
I deh at a different angle on coolie walk of fame. Lol
d2 now nursing a bottle in a basement somewhere as depression sets in over buyer's remorse. CaribJ awaiting his check from the OP so he can continue his propaganda and defend the PNC ineptitude by deflection to the past of the PPP. The other two i am not certain, maybe they are hiding out of shame for helping to bring the PNC to power.
The PNC Constitution is the supreme law of PNC members. Granger addressed the congress as PNC Leader. He was preaching to his party flock, hence his use of the possessive adjective "our".
Gilbakka posted:The PNC Constitution is the supreme law of PNC members. Granger addressed the congress as PNC Leader. He was preaching to his party flock, hence his use of the possessive adjective "our".
You are wrong about this. Read David Hinds article in GC.
VishMahabir posted:Gilbakka posted:The PNC Constitution is the supreme law of PNC members. Granger addressed the congress as PNC Leader. He was preaching to his party flock, hence his use of the possessive adjective "our".
You are wrong about this. Read David Hinds article in GC.
Oii Vish post a link to the article.
Well i enjoyed my Sunday suh i peep in here,this fella Nehru say i am a Cunumunu seems like he had a field day while i was away.I will respond to the Lamatha tomorrow on the article of Granger speaking about the PNC constitution which he partially copied from some kind of Citizenreport which is the F.H.new mouth piece,i will post the whole article so readers on GNI can decide.
He r@$$ don't know how to copy the article from the funny fellas mouth piece,them chaps in F.H think they smart,I got ways to copy and post their funny articles.
August 28, 2016 http://citizensreportgy.com/?p=32038 2,459 Views
“OUR Constitution” is our supreme law, President David Granger declared on Friday at the opening of the 19th Biennial Delegates Congress of the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR).
Granger’s address was the featured speech at the opening of the Congress, where he addressed also addressed the ideology of PNC founder, Forbes Burnham.
He said, “Our Party, founded 59 years ago on 5th October 1957 by Forbes Burnham and Joseph Lachhmansingh, rests securely on our sacred institutions – our Constitution, our supreme law.”
Only weeks ago, the issue of party paramountcy under the PNCR, led by Burnham, was the subject of several media reports, following the release of the Commission of Inquiry report into the death of Dr. Walter Rodney.
RELATED: The early signs of reemerging party paramountcy?
The Commission’s 155-page report concluded Rodney’s assassination was a “State organised” act that was executed with the knowledge of the then Prime Minister Forbes Burnham, who had “large and detailed” knowledge of what was being done by the State and its agencies during his tenure.
The report details also detailed the link to the principle of party paramountcy and the use of the GPF and Guyana Defence Force (GDF), as well as the judiciary, to go after persons who were seen as opposition elements.
The report on page 41, also noted that former president, Forbes Burnham, in 1974, at a PNC Conference, said, “It was decided that the Party should assume unapologetically its paramountcy over the Government, which is merely one of its executive arms.”
According to page 42 of the 155-page of the report, Burnham reasoned that “God says that before you were, I was. The party says to the Government before you were, we were. The government has got to be in our system as a subordinate agency to the party.”
In that context, the report notes that the judiciary, the GPF and, particularly, the GDF was used to enforce the wishes of Burnham and his PNC.
Page 45 of the report stated that Burnham called for the armed forces to “be fully acquainted with the policies of the PNC party.” As such, page 46 adds that the judiciary and ranks “committed themselves to being servants of the Prime Minister (Burnham), rather than official in service of the State.”
The report concluded that Burnham, had such an “absolute” grip and control over the society that he “dehumanised and belittled many Guyanese.”
The result was that opposition elements were constantly harassed, threatened or assaulted and some murdered. “The period under review was one of extreme hardships and difficulties in the life of Guyanese people. The rule of law was systematically subverted on a daily basis. It was replaced by the rule of man in the person of Burnham and the PNC,” the report said on page 59.
RELATED: PNCR leaders defend Burnham in face of Rodney CoI findings, says Burnham to be honoured
Notably, Granger at Friday’s opening made clear that, “Forbes Burnham’s ideas are still relevant today.”
The PNCR’s 19th Biennial Congress ends today.
“OUR Constitution” is our supreme law, President David Granger declared on Friday at the opening of the 19th Biennial Delegates Congress of the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR).
What Granger is saying shouldn't be construed to be related to Guyana Constitution.
He is clearly speaking about the PNC Constitution while he was addressing the delegates at the PNC Congress.
Freedom House decided to take this statement and interpret it as meaning the PNC [Part of an alliance in govt] Constitution is the Supreme Law.
The gullible will swallow this from the funny fellas.
Well Vish,my expectation of your intellect was on the top shelf,maybe i will have to lower it.
The Lamutha Nehru is a gullible fella which is always expected.
Gilbakka posted:The PNC Constitution is the supreme law of PNC members. Granger addressed the congress as PNC Leader. He was preaching to his party flock, hence his use of the possessive adjective "our".
CORRECTION: That should be "possessive pronoun".
Django posted:Granger tells Congress ‘PNCR Constitution’ is our supreme law
August 28, 2016 http://citizensreportgy.com/?p=32038 2,459 Views
“OUR Constitution” is our supreme law, President David Granger declared on Friday at the opening of the 19th Biennial Delegates Congress of the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR).
Granger’s address was the featured speech at the opening of the Congress, where he addressed also addressed the ideology of PNC founder, Forbes Burnham.
He said, “Our Party, founded 59 years ago on 5th October 1957 by Forbes Burnham and Joseph Lachhmansingh, rests securely on our sacred institutions – our Constitution, our supreme law.”
What Granger is saying shouldn't be construed to be related to Guyana Constitution.
He is clearly speaking about the PNC Constitution while he was addressing the delegates at the PNC Congress.
Freedom House decided to take this statement and interpret it as meaning the PNC [Part of an alliance in govt] Constitution is the Supreme Law.
The gullible will swallow this from the funny fellas.
Well Vish,my expectation of your intellect was on the top shelf,maybe i will have to lower it.
That's right. And if Bharrat Jagdeo tells the upcoming PPP congress in December: "Our Party Constitution is the supreme law", he would be perfectly in order. The PPP Constitution is the supreme law governing PPP members.
Some folks have misunderstood Mr Granger's statement. Other folks have deliberately twisted his statement. Later this week, I suspect that some top PNC official will clarify what party leader Granger meant.
Gilbakka posted:Django posted:Granger tells Congress ‘PNCR Constitution’ is our supreme law
August 28, 2016 http://citizensreportgy.com/?p=32038 2,459 Views
“OUR Constitution” is our supreme law, President David Granger declared on Friday at the opening of the 19th Biennial Delegates Congress of the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR).
Granger’s address was the featured speech at the opening of the Congress, where he addressed also addressed the ideology of PNC founder, Forbes Burnham.
He said, “Our Party, founded 59 years ago on 5th October 1957 by Forbes Burnham and Joseph Lachhmansingh, rests securely on our sacred institutions – our Constitution, our supreme law.”
What Granger is saying shouldn't be construed to be related to Guyana Constitution.
He is clearly speaking about the PNC Constitution while he was addressing the delegates at the PNC Congress.
Freedom House decided to take this statement and interpret it as meaning the PNC [Part of an alliance in govt] Constitution is the Supreme Law.
The gullible will swallow this from the funny fellas.
Well Vish,my expectation of your intellect was on the top shelf,maybe i will have to lower it.
That's right. And if Bharrat Jagdeo tells the upcoming PPP congress in December: "Our Party Constitution is the supreme law", he would be perfectly in order. The PPP Constitution is the supreme law governing PPP members.
Some folks have misunderstood Mr Granger's statement. Other folks have deliberately twisted his statement. Later this week, I suspect that some top PNC official will clarify what party leader Granger meant.
I am not questioning what Granger said at the Congress. I get that he was speaking to his party supporters. You and Django misunderstood what I said. I asked you to read David Hinds article in Sunday's Guyana Chronicle. He was arguing that Burnham's paramountcy is alive and well, and it has influenced Granger and his ministers. Add this to the fact that Granger is an admirer of Burnham, was trained intellectually under him, and the fact that the AFC has limited support in the coalition. And furthermore, add this factor to the fact that the PPP is impotent in making changes or in representing their supporters and the fact that Afros feel they now have a right to rule Guyana for all eternity...and you have an unofficial emasculation of the Indos.
I dont know both of you, but you need to look at the lea leaves, and not accept everything that this government is doing blindly.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA BULLSHIT!!!!!! Either you all are very Naive or really dont know the PNC!!!!!!!!!!!!HAHAHAHAHA
Drugb posted:. CaribJ awaiting his check from the OP so he can continue his propaganda and defend the PNC ineptitude by deflection to the past of the PPP.
And druggie is engaged in his bran damage by screaming at APNU and cheering the PPP when in fact there isn't a huge difference between either.
Here is the deal. The PPP was in power for 23 years. They had become arrogant and entrenched. Even if APNU doesn't do better they are a fresh group, and if they fail, or more easily removed. They know this which is why the old men are on a stealing spree.
Now why don't you urge the PPP to transform itself so that it can become an effective opposition party, and have a solid chance to win in 2020? The best way to discipline APNU AFC is by having the PPP provide them with real competition. You cannot because you are a Jagdeo disciple and you think that he is a hero.
Django posted:Granger tells Congress ‘PNCR Constitution’ is our supreme law
August 28, 2016 http://citizensreportgy.com/?p=32038 2,459 Views
He said, “Our Party, founded 59 years ago on 5th October 1957 by Forbes Burnham and Joseph Lachhmansingh, rests securely on our sacred institutions – our Constitution, our supreme law.”
.
So much for those who blame Burnham for starting race voting. And he wasn't the only Indian who left with Burnham either. With Indians way outnumbering Africans (and in those days mixed and Africans voted for DIFFERENT parties) and with Burnham's lust for power, the notion that he would commit suicide by peddling race voting baffles the mind.
The mixed, Portuguese, Chinese, and the whites (who were still in Guyana) were as hostile to Burnham as they were to Cheddi, and even rural blacks and the black middle class didn't trust him. So Burnham had nothing to gain by encouraging race voting. On the other hand Cheddi only needed Indians votes as there were more rural than urban constituencies.
As to party paramountcy! Did it ever end? Guyana has been cursed with this since Janet introduced it, Burnham expanded it, and Jagdeo maintained it.
This is what druggie should be arguing against, but he cannot because he cannot bring himself to admit that the PPP has all the warts that he screams that APNU has. They are but mirror images of each other, and both are tools of the mainly Indo oligarchs.
Where does it say in the speech that Granger said the PNC party constitution is the supreme law? I tell you, when the British left Guyana, it also left a load of dumb PPP citizens with a lack of reading and comprehension skills! Nehru is the emperor of these jackasses.
VishMahabir posted:I am not questioning what Granger said at the Congress. I get that he was speaking to his party supporters. You and Django misunderstood what I said. I asked you to read David Hinds article in Sunday's Guyana Chronicle. He was arguing that Burnham's paramountcy is alive and well, and it has influenced Granger and his ministers. Add this to the fact that Granger is an admirer of Burnham, was trained intellectually under him, and the fact that the AFC has limited support in the coalition. And furthermore, add this factor to the fact that the PPP is impotent in making changes or in representing their supporters and the fact that Afros feel they now have a right to rule Guyana for all eternity...and you have an unofficial emasculation of the Indos.
I dont know both of you, but you need to look at the lea leaves, and not accept everything that this government is doing blindly.
Nagamootoo and Ramjattan are collecting their fat paychecks and watching as Indos are being emasculated.
If Afros feel they'll rule forever, we'll alert International Authorities when things get serious.
VishMahabir posted:Gilbakka posted:Django posted:Granger tells Congress ‘PNCR Constitution’ is our supreme law
August 28, 2016 http://citizensreportgy.com/?p=32038 2,459 Views
“OUR Constitution” is our supreme law, President David Granger declared on Friday at the opening of the 19th Biennial Delegates Congress of the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR).
Granger’s address was the featured speech at the opening of the Congress, where he addressed also addressed the ideology of PNC founder, Forbes Burnham.
He said, “Our Party, founded 59 years ago on 5th October 1957 by Forbes Burnham and Joseph Lachhmansingh, rests securely on our sacred institutions – our Constitution, our supreme law.”
What Granger is saying shouldn't be construed to be related to Guyana Constitution.
He is clearly speaking about the PNC Constitution while he was addressing the delegates at the PNC Congress.
Freedom House decided to take this statement and interpret it as meaning the PNC [Part of an alliance in govt] Constitution is the Supreme Law.
The gullible will swallow this from the funny fellas.
Well Vish,my expectation of your intellect was on the top shelf,maybe i will have to lower it.
That's right. And if Bharrat Jagdeo tells the upcoming PPP congress in December: "Our Party Constitution is the supreme law", he would be perfectly in order. The PPP Constitution is the supreme law governing PPP members.
Some folks have misunderstood Mr Granger's statement. Other folks have deliberately twisted his statement. Later this week, I suspect that some top PNC official will clarify what party leader Granger meant.
I am not questioning what Granger said at the Congress. I get that he was speaking to his party supporters. You and Django misunderstood what I said. I asked you to read David Hinds article in Sunday's Guyana Chronicle. He was arguing that Burnham's paramountcy is alive and well, and it has influenced Granger and his ministers. Add this to the fact that Granger is an admirer of Burnham, was trained intellectually under him, and the fact that the AFC has limited support in the coalition. And furthermore, add this factor to the fact that the PPP is impotent in making changes or in representing their supporters and the fact that Afros feel they now have a right to rule Guyana for all eternity...and you have an unofficial emasculation of the Indos.
I dont know both of you, but you need to look at the lea leaves, and not accept everything that this government is doing blindly.
August 27, 2016 Source
IN THE run-up to the current PNC congress, that party’s chairman, Basil Williams, when asked about the vitality of the party, made a very revealing statement: He suggested that when Government ministers who are PNC members go out on Government duty, they are also representing the party.The statement caught my eye because it raises anew an old question: Should there be a clear line of separation between party and State? For a party that has had to endure the charge that its declared doctrine of paramountcy of the party over the State in 1974 was the root cause of Government descent into rampant authoritarianism, I find Williams’s statement quite interesting.
Here is the quote from the August 19 edition of the Guyana Chronicle, and it is noteworthy: “Additionally, the PNC chairman said President David Granger, who is also Leader of the party, travels the country and speaks with citizens. That, he said, is also a representation of the PNC.
‘When we go out, we sometimes go out in both capacities -– as Government officials and Members of Parliament (MPs), [to] do party work,’ noted Williams. He said there is a thin line between being a Minister of the Government and a Member of Parliament or party representative. The chairman explained that MPs are expected to act in the interest of the party which they represent. Speaking on the issue, General Secretary of the PNC, Oscar Clarke, said oftentimes President Granger is interpreted to be speaking as President only, but he is in fact speaking on behalf of the party.”
The statements attributed to Chairman Williams and General Secretary Clarke point to a problem that could have some serious consequences for relations within the APNU+AFC coalition. Williams says there is a thin line between the roles of MP, minister and party representative. I disagree with him. There are very clear distinctions among those offices.
The minister is an officer of the State. He or she represents all of the people of the country, regardless of party affiliation. The minister is not appointed by the party; he or she is appointed by the Head of Government in his or her capacity as the Chief Officer of the Government. Mr. Granger does not appoint ministers in his capacity as leader of the PNC or APNU; he does so as President. Further, once Mr. Granger had taken the oath as President, he became President of all of Guyana. His role as a partisan is immediately greatly diminished, and so do the roles of the ministers he appoints.
The role of the MP is much more complex; but, in the end, it’s similar to those of the President and the ministers. The MP is also an officer of the State, representing both the country as a whole and the geographical area he or she directly represents or is assigned to by the parliamentary leader. Although in our system the party determines who sits in Parliament, once an MP is deemed to be elected, in a real sense, he or she no longer represents the party. So while the MP is expected to also represent the interests of the party in the National Assembly, he or she is not bound to vote along party lines. The MP is ultimately answerable to those who elected him or her.
The role of party representative is straightforward. Often, the leading officers of the party speak on its behalf, and represent it at various fora, such as press conferences and party congresses. The problem is when, as often is the case in Guyana, the three roles are fused into one person — for example, Mr. Granger is President, Leader of APNU, leader of the PNC; Mr. Harmon is Minister of Government, General Secretary of APNU, MP, and member of the PNC — when that person speaks, in what capacity is he or she speaking? That person cannot be speaking or acting in more than one capacity at a time. In this regard, it is a good sign that some ministers have declined to run for top posts in the PNC.
I am acutely aware that parties have interests and agendas, and they expect their members to advocate for those in the Legislature and the Executive branches. I have absolutely no problem with that. In fact, I think that is necessary; but I do have a problem with the deliberate blurring of the lines between party and State, as Williams and Clarke seem to be suggesting.
When a minister goes into a community, he or she must state very clearly in what capacity he or she is so doing. This is especially important since we have a partnership Government comprising several parties, and because our political environment is so sensitive. The PNC blurred those lines to its peril, and the PPP took it to scandalous levels. This Government needs to steer clear of that temptation. Mr. Granger and the ministers must resist going down the road suggested by the PNC Chairman and General Secretary. As difficult as it is in the circumstances, there must be clear lines of separation between party and State. We cannot afford to even flirt with the notion of paramountcy of the party again.
But having said the above, I am quite aware that Williams and Clarke are grappling with a real issue that the PNC, AFC and WPA have to confront sooner rather than later: The role of the party when it is part of a larger entity than itself. I make bold to say that the formation and successes of the APNU and the APNU+AFC Coalition have diminished the identities and appeal of their constituent members. As an electoral brand, the PNC is no longer as potent as it used to be; an entire generation of its constituency is being socialized as APNU, and not PNC. The party, to my mind, is slow to grasp this reality.
As an aside, when I am invited to speak in some so-called PNC strongholds — as I often am — some PNC members usually whisper in the communities that I have a partisan agenda that is aimed at building the WPA at the expense of the PNC. I find that very amusing, largely because it exposes a lack of understanding of the changing dynamics of Guyanese politics. I do not ever speak anywhere as WPA if it is not a WPA event. I am aware that when I am invited to speak, it is either in my individual capacity or as APNU. To go to an event and speak as WPA is to insult my hosts and narrow my message. I have found that narrow, partisan messages are increasingly unwanted among the masses; they know you belong to a party, but they tend to be less interested in your partisan message.
My prediction is that partnership politics will overtake party politics sooner rather than later. This does not mean that parties would become irrelevant; it simply means that they would have to adapt to this reality. Understandably, the PNC is having a hard time coming to grips with that reality, given its sense of bigness. Once you go down the road of partnership, it becomes difficult to calculate which party brings in more votes. Voters respond to the totality of the parties and what that represents. When the masses respond to Mr. Granger with much love, they are not responding to the PNC leader, but to the APNU leader and President Granger. So, too, are the response to Nagamootoo and Roopnaraine. Political time has moved on, and so must the PNC and the other constituent parties of the Coalition. The parties are now challenged to become sources of ideas to drive Government policies and serve as bridges between the Government and the communities.
(Dr. David Hinds, a political activist and commentator, is an Associate Professor of Political Science and Caribbean and African Diaspora Studies at Arizona State University. More of his writings and commentaries can be found on his YouTube Channel Hinds’ Sight: Dr. David Hinds’ Guyana-Caribbean Politics and on his website www.guyanacaribbeanpolitics.com. Send comments to dhinds6106@aol.com)
VishMahabir posted:. He was arguing that Burnham's paramountcy is alive and well, and it has influenced Granger and his ministers.
When we see Jagdeo prancing around screaming that the (Burnham) constitution was the best in the Caribbean how come you didn't think that of him?
In fact Jagdeo is a big admirer of Burnham, merely lacking his charisma, but clearly he channels the Kabaka in how he conducts himself.
When Guyanese learn not to ignore bad behavior because "is ahbe people" then we can move forward.
Criticize Granger for sure. But don't go on as if the PPP didn't play a role in this. In fact what ideas are the PPP bringing to change the constitution? Or are they waiting until they return to power, at which time they will once again praise (Burnham's) constitution?
And please note two things.
1. Some one who has a role WITHIN APNU is criticizing how the PNC operates. And some within the AFC have been similarly vocal.
2. He is able to do so in a media that is CONTROLLED by the gov't.
I can only wonder why during the PPP era, we never heard such honesty from some one from Civic, or why they would NEVER have been allowed to use the Chronicle. In fact had they done this they would have been forced out of the party as indeed Ramkarran most recently has been.
Access to this requires a premium membership.