Dear Editor
THE Guyana Trades Union Congress (GTUC) in the strongest possible term expresses concern about the out-of-order statement issued today by the United States, United Kingdom and European Union as to when an election can be held following the Caribbean Court of Justice’s (CCJ) ruling on 18th June, 2019, that the 21st December 2018 no-confidence vote was validly passed. Nowhere in the Judgement handed down by the CCJ on 12th July, pertaining to the 18th June ruling, was the timeline set as September 18th. Nor did the 14th August ruling by acting Chief Justice (CJ) Roxane George-Wiltshire SC set a date as no later than September 18th.

In fact, when 18th September was proposed by the Opposition’s representative to the CCJ our own media — Stabroek News on the 13th July — noted the court “declined” the request (Refer to “CCJ dubs gov’t ‘caretaker’ but elections date a no-go”). Acting CJ on 14th August ruled the High Court cannot rule that elections must be held by September 18th 2019, which is a reiteration of the CCJ’s ruling. GTUC invites members of the identified diplomatic community to have an objective re-reading of these rulings.

It is erroneous to advise Guyanese and the world that “by surpassing September 18, the Government is currently in breach of the Constitution following its failure to adhere to the decisions of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) on 18 June and its subsequent orders.” This view is not only unfortunate but erroneous, risking the consequence of impugning the erstwhile reputation of the CCJ and the esteemed justices who presided over the case. This is treading on dangerous waters. This nation must have an election consistent with Article 106(7) of the Guyana Constitution. Litigation by the parties on the validity of the no-confidence vote was not settled until June by Guyana’s court of last resort, the CCJ.

Whether it could be argued that either or both parties used the court system as a delaying tactic is beside the point, for both have exercised the constitutional right to legal justice. This act must be heralded as a progressive step by Guyana to resolve differences in a lawful and orderly manner.

In the exercise of the right, the minimum timeframe within which an election could have been held, i.e. by 22nd March 2019, which is “within three months” was overtaken. This now kicks in the next proviso “or such longer period.” The realisation of this requires not only GECOM stating its readiness as to when an election could be held, but also activation of the said proviso of “by not less than two-thirds of the votes of all the elected members of the national assembly so determine….” Both the CCJ and acting CJ have ruled there must be compliance with the extant article.

President David Granger cannot issue a date for election outside of the National Assembly granting the authority to do so, since the three months period has lapsed. Where the Guyana Elections Commission on Wednesday announced its timeline as to its readiness for General and Regional Elections, Government and Opposition must commence engagement not only on an election date, but also on matters of day-to-day governance.

The GTUC is not unmindful of support/ solidarity with regard to governance as Guyanese navigate the new terrain (no-confidence era) what we reject, in the strongest possible terms, is support for violating the Constitution and Laws of Guyana and disrespecting the independence and rulings of our judicature. We expect the representative of these countries– notwithstanding their current internal political turmoil–to also respect us–notwithstanding ours — to seek orderly and lawful means in resolving differences. Likewise, as citizens of their countries expect no less, Guyanese are no less deserving.

Further, the implied threat that the current situation “also hinders [the US, UK & EU] ability to support Guyana’s development needs” is most unfortunate given the premise upon which such position has been arrived at. Gut feeling, propaganda and/or influence-peddling that the election should be held by September 18th without an act of the National Assembly or GECOM’s advising as to its readiness are not only reckless but unjust, coming from the Western world where ‘lesser’ countries such as ours have been socialised to look up to as the bastion of democracy. If these bodies must take a side it bodes well for nationhood and worldwide comity for such to be consistent with the Rule of Law.

The Rule of Law must prevail in the West equally as it must in this small resource-rich South American nation called Guyana. Both the interim/caretaker President and interim/caretaker Leader of the Opposition must engage on a way forward, including returning to the National Assembly and putting systems in place how government will function in this period until an election is held and a new government is elected, or the incumbent re-elected.

The leader of the opposition forms part of the executive as per the Constitution (Chapter X). Ipso facto, if the government has caretaker/interim status, likewise is the status of the said office and its holder; good sense must prevail. Any political and constitutional act, inaction or uncertainty they must be held to account in equal measure. We must hold the feet of both to the fire to give meaning to Article 106, which the court upheld.

The GTUC invites our Western partners to join with the workers of Guyana in calling on both Government and Opposition to respect the ruling of the judiciary and the Constitution as expressed. Guyana and Guyanese now more than ever need this type of solidarity, for interest on rights and the Rule of Law we would like to think are not mutually exclusive, but intertwined.
Regards
Guyana Trades Union Congress