— PPP unparliamentary conduct draws wide condemnation

THE Opposition People’s Progressive Party (PPP) has been roundly condemned for what has been described as their “despicable” behaviour in the Parliament chamber last week with President David Granger labelling them “vulgarians.”
The Guyana Chronicle has been reliably informed that government will likely make a formal complaint to the Speaker of the House Dr Barton Scotland, with a view to having the PPP Members of Parliament (MPs) sanctioned for the placard-bearing protest last week in the House that interrupted the President’s address.
The PPP has since tried to defend its behaviour, but only their supporters have sought to justify their actions.

Speaking over the weekend at the 5th Biennial Conference People’s National Congress Reform’s (PNCR) North American Region held in Atlanta, Georgia, USA, President Granger said, “Another good reason for me to be here, as I said last night, is that I need to take refuge from the vulgarians… the vulgarians can get you down and you come under severe attack. It’s good to be among friends. Look at here, no placards and I can speak without interruption.”

Online media entity, Demerara Waves, reported too that the President referred to last Thursday as “a day of infamy in the annals of the parliamentary record of Guyana.”

DISGUSTING EPISODES
“It will go down as one of the most disgusting episodes of parliamentary misbehaviour,” Demerara Waves reported.
According to the report, President Granger, who is also the leader of the PNCR, said Thursday’s behaviour demonstrates clearly that “No other party at this time or in the future can give Guyana the quality of leadership…” it deserves.

“Another reason why we are here today is because more than ever I am convinced that the PPP does not deserve to run the government of Guyana. Its disdain for democracy, its contempt for culture…,” Demerara Waves quoted him as saying.
Additionally, the head-of-state in passing referenced Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo’s placard which contained the word divide incorrectly spelled as “devide.”
“The PNC is the face of the future. We are what Guyana looks like, not the people that you saw on Thursday. We can spell,” he stated, while declaring that his party is the “conscience of the country.”

On Thursday, at the opening ceremony of the 71st Sitting of the 11th Parliament, the President outlined his administration’s plans while highlighting achievements over the past two years. However, his address was inaudible due to a vociferous protest by the opposition. The opposition MPs held placards which said, “Granger’s first attempt to rigging the elections”, “untrustworthy”, and “strangling democracy” to name a few.
The move by the PPP to protest in such a manner has been condemned by many. On Sunday, Stabroek News in its editorial reminded that Parliament is no longer what it was in the past, noting that parliamentarians are ever more disrespectful within parliamentary confines.

“Of course, what happened on Thursday is also a reflection of the lack of communication and the polarisation in society at large. It is too a reflection of an inability to understand the role certain institutions have to play if any meaningful society is to be built, and the respect they must of necessity be accorded.

“If such institutions — and Parliament is one — are just treated like any old building where gang members, for example, gather to lime and shout at one another, then the nation can never evolve, because there will be no venerable traditions on which to found it,” the editorial titled ‘The President and Parliament’ stated.

Former Speaker of the National Assembly and attorney Ralph Ramkarran in his weekly column also published in the Stabroek News on Sunday described the PPP’s protest during the President’s speech as “unparliamentary behavior.”

Meanwhile, veteran trade unionist and columnist for the Guyana Chronicle, Lincoln Lewis, opined that the protest events, in and around the National Assembly confirms Leader of the Opposition Bharrat Jagdeo’s threat to the Government of his party’s “intent of engaging in non-cooperation and protests will be supported by actions.”

TURN OF TABLE
“Those placards, including Jagdeo’s, that attracted the public’s attention and amusement with dividing spelt as ‘deviding,’ brought into sharp focus how the table has turned,” said Lewis, who noted that as President Jagdeo was intolerant of dissent.

“It is important to remind society as the current PPP leadership has the temerity to talk about democracy being under threat and the constitution violated, positioning itself on a moral perch as guardians of, this group has no moral leg to stand on. It was under this leadership [that] the constitution was stomped on, and citizens’ democratic rights and freedoms taken away or curtailed,” Lewis declared.
The opposition since the appointment of Justice (ret’d) James Patterson as chairman of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), has maintained that it will not cooperate with the administration.

In fact, they see the appointment of Justice Patterson, as a move by the coalition government to rig the upcoming 2020 elections.
Patterson has since said he has no political affiliation. The opposition had submitted 18 nominees for the said post but all were deemed rejected by President Granger.
On Sunday too, Working People’s Alliance (WPA) member and columnist, in the Guyana Chronicle, Dr. David Hinds in his column called for the scrapping of the Carter- Price formula which was in place prior to the 1992 general elections.

He reminded that the central tenet was that the two major parties, the PNC and the PPP, were afforded equal representation on the commission and that the chair enjoyed the confidence of both sides. The formula also broadened the selection of the chair to include inputs from the opposition leader. Up until then, the selection was the sole power of the President.

“Critically, while the formula broadened the process, the ultimate power of the President to make the final choice was left intact,” said Dr Hinds, who noted that with the formula being placed in the constitution of Guyana, the provisions are subject to interpretation.
He opined that the constitution does not clearly state at what point the President can act unilaterally.

“I think he can only do so if the system breaks down, because the lists provided by the opposition leader violate the spirit of the constitution and that the electoral system is threatened by the absence of a GECOM chair.”
Additionally, Dr Hinds is of the strong view that the Carter formula does not say in expressed language where the ultimate power to choose lies, thereby leaving it up to interpretation.

“And in a politically volatile society like Guyana, that is a political liability,” he opined.