As the country reflects on its democratic status 21 years after the latter was returned in the wake of decades of struggle against rigged elections, there are allegations by opposition forces that the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/ C) government continues to use the 1980 Constitution, which had confirmed the existential dictatorial rule of the People’s National Congress (PNC).
Such charges ignore the fundamental changes in that Constitution wrought by the constitutional reform process initiated in 1999 and implemented in 2000. The alterations were so far reaching that for all intents and purposes, a new Constitution had been created.
The government had commenced the process for constitutional change as early as 1995, when a Constitutional Reform Commission (CRC) was formed and hearings were held across the country, as well in a Parliamentary Select Committee.
The process was interrupted by the 1997 elections, which the PPP/ C won according to all foreign and domestic observers.
The PNC, however, claimed that the poll was flawed and launched massive street protests that segued into ethnically directed riots and violence. The Caribbean Community (Caricom) – brokered the Herdmanson Accord of January 17, 1998, which included an agreement to complete the reform of the 1980 Constitution.
A new 20-person CRC, acceptable to all parliamentary parties, was assembled and included individuals drawn from the widest possible cross-section of society. For six months, the CRC conducted hearings and took submissions from every Guyanese individual or organisation that expressed a wish to do so.
Their submissions were reviewed by a parliamentary Joint Select Committee, which then furthered the 182 recommendations (drawn from 32 subject areas) to the Oversight Committee of the National Assembly.
The final changes were approved unanimously in 2000 by all the parties in the National Assembly, including the PNC. Surely, 182 alterations in the 1980 Constitution proposed from such a diverse body of national opinion, could not have resulted in “the same old 1980” Constitution after 2000.
The most criticised feature of the 1980 Constitution had been the powers allocated to the presidency: he was a de facto dictator, who for the first time in the history of the Commonwealth had complete veto power. He could be president for life and could hire and fire at will most public officials (Article 232) and determine the length of tenure of others whom he might not have even appointed.
In the new Constitution, the powers of the president are diminished considerably, while those of the opposition leader (who had been derided as “Minority Leader” in the 1980 Constitution) and the Parliament, are increased.
The president is now limited to two terms and his power to fire is now restricted only to those individuals not appointed by the service commissions. Even on those offices he created, if their salaries are charged to the Consolidated Fund, the appointments must be reviewed by the National Assembly.
In critical constitutional appointments such as the commissioner of police, the chancellor of the judiciary and the chief justice, the opposition leader has veto power, since his agreement is necessary for confirmation. It is for this reason that some constitutional offices have been occupied by individuals in an “acting” capacity.
The Elections Commission had been the vehicle for rigging elections in the past, but the president can now only appoint its chairman from a list submitted by the opposition leader. Under the 1980 Constitution, the president merely had to call the Minority Leader and that was considered as a “consultation” to satisfy that requirement.
Now, the term “meaningful consultation” has been constitutionally defined to ensure that the president obtains the opinion of the opposition leader. Parliament also obtained a greater share of power in the new Constitution, with four sectoral committees now scrutinising all areas of governmental policy and administration in real time.
Finally, the president can also now be impeached and cannot dissolve Parliament to evade such a sanction or circumvent it by appointing the tribunal to investigate the charges. All in the new Guyana Constitution.
