Dear Editor
IT should be recalled that it was Bharrat Jagdeo and the PPP who amended the constitution to place the clause that states: “Provided that if the Leader of the Opposition fails to submit a list as provided for, the President shall appoint a person who holds or has held office as a judge of a court having unlimited jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters in some part of the Commonwealth, or a court having jurisdiction in appeals from any such court, or who is qualified to be appointed as any such judge.”

This clause was placed in Bill No 2 of 2000 by Jagdeo and the PPP while they operated on the false premise that they would never lose power. Clearly, it is Jagdeo and the PPP that laid the basis to move away from the Carter Formula. That is what happens to persons of Jagdeo’s ilk whose desire is power and not the promotion of democracy.

The intention of Jagdeo and the PPP was to have a mechanism to subvert the Carter Formula if they couldn’t find someone on the opposition list to serve their interest. To this end, they amended the constitution and put in place a clause permitting him to act unilaterally and legally at the same time. Unfortunately for the megalomaniac, he and the PPP lost power in 2015 and their own doing has come back to haunt them.

It is Jagdeo’s desire to act unilaterally that led him to make a unilateral decision constitutional. Why is he crying foul when he placed the clause in the constitution? The lesson to be learnt is that law should be made for the good of all and not for the extant dictator — in this case the dictator Jagdeo.

President Granger is expected to operate based on law and he did, using the law created by Jagdeo and the PPP. It is therefore laughable that Jagdeo and the PPP could be deeming the President’s action unilateral. The President’s action is constitutional. It is the PPP and Jagdeo’s desire to act unilaterally, as they did throughout their terms in office, that led them to rather than promote democracy, to place a clause in the constitution that has returned to haunt them.

It must be the irony of the century for Jagdeo to call anyone a hypocrite; that Jagdeo is the indisputable hypocrite in Guyana is well known. To be both corrupt and a hypocrite is the summit of indecency – in this regard Jagdeo is unchallenged.

The English dictionary defines a hypocrite as “a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion,” or “a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs and feelings,” and I add, in contradiction to their actions. By all definitions, Jagdeo is the chief national hypocrite. This man who throughout his presidency violated the constitution, now purports to be protecting it. Has Jagdeo forgotten that the law states that government funds must be placed in the Consolidated Fund and during his reign of arbitrary use of power, he never did operate based on law. Has he forgotten that he did as he liked with the Lotto Funds in violation of the law?

Jagdeo must be reminded that while he imposed a rule which said that if you got land from the government you couldn’t sell it until you have owned it for 10 years. Hope he recalls that he broke that rule. Jagdeo has a legal right to talk. What he doesn’t have is a moral right to do so. His actions as a President were the nadir of national lawlessness.

As for respect, I am glad you don’t respect President Granger. That you don’t respect him is because he has ended the lawlessness and has a different philosophy to yours. We don’t need the respect of a man who allowed murders to go unsolved, drugs and violence to dominate our society and a few including he Jagdeo to get rich at the expense of the people.

I am dead sure that at the end of this President’s tenure, he will not have to defend ill-gotten gains. Unfortunately, that is not true of you and the PPP leadership. One author once noted that leaders should “practise what they preach or change their speech.” Guyana awaits your change of speech, so that we will not see you as a hypocrite.

Regards
Aubrey C. Norton