ON Sunday January 8 at the Annual Media Brunch held at State House, President David Granger addressed the proposed appointment of a Chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM). Incumbent Chairman, Dr Steve Surujbally, resigned with effect from November 30, 2016, but has been asked by the President to stay on until his replacement is found. Last November, President Granger wrote Leader of the Opposition, Bharrat Jagdeo, requesting that he submit a list of nominees “not unacceptable” to him consistent with Article 161 (2) of the Guyana Constitution, which would allow him to extract one to be appointed chairman. This article stipulates who are likely to be among the persons to be considered. The persons are from among those who are judges or who had held the position of judge in any part of the Commonwealth, or are likely to be among this group, or “any other fit and proper person.”
It is the President’s view that the present list submitted to him is found to be “unacceptable.” Without getting into the nitty-gritty of the matter, suffice it to say there is a view that disagrees with the President’s, most notably the Leader of the Opposition, whose role it is to submit the list of nominees.
And while the opposition has expressed concern about the way forward and the President under Article 161 (2) paragraph 2 has the authority to appoint in the absence of an agreement of someone from the list, he has requested the Opposition Leader to submit another list which would afford him wider consideration. The act of requesting another list indicates that the President is looking for consensus, rather than holding to a position as perceived by the opposition that he intends to appoint someone not recommended by the Leader of the Opposition. This action augurs well for our politics.
Our society is still tending the scars of recent People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) governments dealing with issues in which the opposition, interest groups, and individuals may have raised concerns. Whatever decision the PPP/C governments took on any issue they conceptualized — whether right or wrong and regardless of what evidence may have been presented to them — their track record has been one where public opinion that did not sit with theirs didn’t matter. And here is where the nation is urged to pause, lest we miss an aspect of our politics — however minute — that should it be nurtured can help us to grow from strength to strength. It is not the intent of this editorial to analyse the merits or demerits of the exchanges that have brought us to where we are presently on the matter. It is the intent to draw attention to an aspect of our political culture where listening to alternative views has not been a common feature.
The Leader of the Opposition, who held the presidency for 12 years, would not find it difficult to admit that was not something he would have welcomed or would have reacted to positively. His was a leadership known for verbally abusing and denying persons and organisations who dare challenge his view, decision-making, or management of the State. There was a general perception that fear pervaded the land as a result of his attitude and behaviour and persons felt it was safer to be silent than to speak out.
And though our politics has its ups and downs — and some may argue more downs than ups — if the political leadership can present assurance that the people can count on and rely on them to ultimately do right by them, it is a breath of fresh air. The President’s act of requesting that the Opposition Leader submit another list is evident; he is responding to other opinions, which has not been a feature of recent politics, though it remains one the citizenry has been requesting.
In spite of the various expressions of identifying, and ultimately finding the candidate to be appointed, where our political leaders can cultivate and apply that sense of servant leadership and humility to listen to the people, including dissenters, and act in a manner that would lend to assurance that all views matter, is helpful. This opportunity must be seized and built on for our common good, not ignored or squandered in the midst of the noise.