THE Combined Opposition is “banging its head” against Guyana’s Constitution, which contains the very provisions that they themselves both demanded and supported. This was the contention of Presidential Governance Advisor and Government Chief Whip in the House,Gail Teixeira, during a recent broadcast of ‘Political Scope’, aired on the National Communications Network (NCN).

According to her, there have been many criticisms of the existing provisions of the Constitution; however, she underscored the fact that these provisions were approved by the Opposition during the 1999 to 2001 constitutional reform process.
“The Constitutional reform process of 1999 to 2001 was one that the Opposition demanded, that they supported…it is support for the same powers they are now criticizing,” she said.
CONSENSUS FOR CHANGE
Teixeira added that parts of the 1980 Constitution, relative to the powers of the President were not changed and in the last few years these prerogatives have been the basis for constant criticisms.
According to Teixeira, none of the powers being denigrated by the political opposition as dictatorial and abusive were not changed, by consensus, as both government and opposition had agreed to the constitutional measures currently in place.
“These (powers left unchanged) are part of the President’s prerogatives,” she said.
The existing Constitution also benefited from a series of nationwide consultations, during which the inputs of a wide cross-section of the Guyanese people, including organized labour, religious and cultural organizations and other interested parties and groups were considered. The Private Sector also participated and made inputs to the Constitutional Reform Committee.
The reforms to the 2001 Constitution were debated and, as required by law, supported by a two-thirds majority in the National Assembly.

CHANCES FOR COMPROMISE IGNORED
The Presidential Advisor added that even in the exercise of these prerogatives the Head of State has offered opportunities for compromise.
Teixeira stressed that each one of these opportunities for compromise has not been utilized by the combined Opposition.
“There have been no real compromises reached in the Parliament by the political opposition, and with the one seat majority, they operate in a dictatorial manner,” she said, adding that the combined Opposition has been trying to use the National Assembly to control Government, outside of government.
An example the Presidential Advisor cited was President Ramotar’s decision to decline assent to what, in his estimation, are unconstitutional Bills – relating to local government processes – and return them to the House with an explanation of his reasoning.
Constitutionally, to decline to assent to a bill is a prerogative of the President. Article 170 (2) of the Constitution provides that when a Bill is presented to the President for assent, he shall “signify that he assents or that he withholds assent.” Section 3 adds that: “Where the President withholds his assent to a Bill, he shall return it to the Speaker within twenty-one days of the date when it was presented to him for assent with a message stating the reasons why he has withheld the assent.”
However, despite his conviction, relative to the constitutionality of the Bill, President Ramotar offered to sign the Bills if his decision was challenged in a court of law and he was proven wrong.
The Head of State has himself publicly alluded to the dangers in reversing his decision to sign Bills which he said are unconstitutional, as per his legal advice. He cited the Esther Pereira Elections Petition case of 1998, in which, despite an agreement by Members of Parliament, a legal case did result. “How do I know if I sign this, despite my legal advice, that another Esther Pereira will raise its head and impeach me,” the Head of State had pondered.
Close to a year has elapsed, Teixeira said, yet the Opposition has not moved to the courts to question the President’s reasoning for not signing the bills.
“They know that these bills are unconstitutional,” she stressed.
NOTHING NEW
The Presidential Advisor also drew a parallel between local happenings and what obtains in other jurisdictions.
The example of the United States Congress, which is now controlled by the Republicans, was referenced by Teixeira and she stated that even President Barrack Obama refused to sign onto Bills he disagreed with.
The difference, however, she said, is that that the opposing powers of the USA have “risen to the occasion” and the Republicans have supported the Democratic Party, which controls the Executive, when the need arose – in the interest of their people.
In Guyana, Teixeira contends that the combined Opposition has not put the Guyanese people and, by extension, Guyana first – a fact that is evidenced by the positions taken, if only for the sake of a ‘skewed sense’ of political gain, in the National Assembly over the last three years.

(By Vanessa Narine)