Dear Editor
RESPONCE is being made to Robin Singh’s letter “Et tu, Lincoln?” (Kaieteur News, 14th August, 2019). I am not sure if this Robin is the one who presents himself on facebook and elsewhere as part of “Camp Ali” i.e. a supporter of PPP/C presidential candidate, Irfaan Ali. This notwithstanding, evidently based on the writer’s arguments, he desires of me to be in a camp. Let it be known, I am in a camp. That camp is called the Rule of Law.

On the matter of the Caribbean Court of Justice’s (CCJ) rulings and orders this nation continues to witness the interpretations of persons presented as though these are the decisions of the Court. An interpretation is different from a decision. In the decision of the CCJ, with regards to when an election is to be held, there was no mention to the 18th September.

Refer to: http://www.ccj.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/2019-CCJ-14-AJ.pdf [2019] CCJ 14 (AJ) IN THE CARIBBEAN COURT OF JUSTICE Appellate Jurisdiction ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL OF GUYANA CCJ Appeal No. GYCV2019/009 Between CHRISTOPHER RAM APPELLANT, THE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION, JOSEPH HARMON, GUYANA ELECTIONS COMMISSION – ccj.org

[2019] CCJ 14 (AJ) JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT [1] These cases were consolidated and heard together on 9 and 10 May 2019. On 18 June 2019, this Court rendered its judgement in which it reached a number of www.ccj.org
The 18th September has been an interpretation applied by some. To ask or expect of me to follow the band who have so interpreted, while for Robin it may place me in the category of what he considers a “stab in the back for us all” by a “member of civil society,” shows how polarising and irrational some are becoming in the quest to make their interpretation the Court’s decision.

Robin is being called on to show where in the CCJ’s ruling it stipulates in an order that elections be held by 18thSeptember. Until the High Court, which has before it a case calling for elections to be held by such date, so makes the decision, my position stands! 18th September was never mentioned by the court. Contrary to the misinformation he is peddling, I am fully aware of the Court’s decision for the election to be held within the timeframe as stipulated by Article 106 of the Guyana Constitution. I have consistently pointed to same and called for its respect. What is clearly missing from the national discourse is that the implementation of the Court’s decisions requires a meeting of minds by the political operatives. This is an appeal yours truly have been repeatedly making and reiterate today.

On the matter of showing respect for Article 13 (i.e. inclusionary democracy) Robin is applying a disingenuous tactic in the hope that wool could be pulled over the eyes of the people. As a principal proponent for giving true meaning– via policies, programmes and legislation– to this fundamental declaration of our political system, once again this nation missed the opportunity to get it right.

The CCJ, on the 18th June, sent back the parties to work out modalities on how they will proceed consistent with the decisions it handed down. Justice Wit said, “We are hoping for a happy marriage between principle and practicality.” This entreaty, was it implemented, would have seen constructive engagement between and among groups, giving life to Article 13. Wit’s request went straight over the heads of many, lending impression that even the court may not be able to help us to get the fundamentals of governance correct. No wonder we are in this conundrum today. Rather than seeking to come together on a common platform which the CCJ’s decisions afford us, some are veering into camps of irrationality and stubbornness. Robin is not excluded.

The PPP/C’s interpretation of the CCJ’s decision on when an election ought to be held and its attempts to corral national thinking and action inconsistent with said decision, shall not find a party in me. I am steadfastly in the camp of the Rule of Law. Who benefits or is offended by such activism, it is incidental.
Regards
Lincoln Lewis