THE practice of accountability which rest on the foundation of moral obligation was thrown wide open for debate recently. One of the most powerful institutions in society and in political theory is regarded as a safeguard of freedom of expression, the press, became wildly unaccountable over the issue with Professor Randolph Persaud.
Before the Persaud situation became public, lack of accountability accusations saturated the press over the behavior of civil society groups. Questions were posed to Transparency Institute of Guyana, Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA), Article 13, and several women groups, about their lack of accountability. The council of the GHRA has never been made public. GHRA has no council.
The subject of accountability among civil society organisations reached a toxic level when Mr. Ralph Ramkarran in an interview with David Hinds said he got a “good cussing up” for a column he did in which he wrote that there are several areas of Guyanese sociology that civil society entities can pronounce on but choose topics that they can sex up.
Should the press and civil society be accountable? Even the mere question is silly. The institutions of state and the rest of society have to be accountable. Moral obligation does not rest solely on elected ruling politicians. One particular institution which functionalism rests exclusively on ensuring that society remains accountable to itself is the judiciary. But is the judiciary in Guyana practicing responsibility to the nation?
The story of lack of judicial accountability is sweeping the United States. The federal Supreme Court in the US is heading for a clash with the legislature. Last week, Supreme Court judge, Samuel Alito told the Wall Street Journal that he is opposed to Congress proceeding with a Code of Conduct for Supreme Court justices. A battle is coming up between these two branches of power. In May of this year, American Chief Justice, John Roberts said that he was reflecting on the ways to make the Supreme Court adhere to the highest professional standards.
Let’s shift judicial accountability to Guyana. In 2021, the budget for the judiciary was $3,112,343,000; 2022- $3,113,023,000; 2023- $4,084,263,000. This is public money thus putting the onus on the judiciary to deliver service to the nation. The question is what quality of service is the country getting? Let’s look at the Time Limit On Judicial Decision Act 2009 which specify a time limit in respect of 197 (3) of the constitution.
The Act states that there must be a written or oral decision not less than 120 days from the conclusion of the hearing in civil cases. In the case of the Full Court and Court Of Appeal, the deadline is not more than 30 days. Section Six of the Act states that a judge may be removed from office for persistently failing to give oral or written decisions. Section Seven outlines the situation where the Chancellor shall write the Registrar about the judge’s violation of the time limit and if this pattern persists, action may be taken against the judge.
The Act also stipulates that the Chancellor should instruct the Registrar to submit an annual report to the Speaker of the National Assembly not later than March 31 of the succeeding year on judges who have not complied with the legal requirement of meeting deadlines. It should be noted that Article 193 (3) of the constitution provides for removal of judges for “persistently not writing decisions.” Finally, the Act states that a judge who retires and have outstanding decisions will suffer a penalty on his/her pension.
What an ironic country Guyana has been the past 100 years. Judges who sit on the bench to ensure that the population is made to be accountable and assign sanctions on citizens who are derelict in their constitutional and legal responsibilities are themselves failing to meet the requirements of the law. Judges have retired and have decisions pending. Many judges are still to provide written and oral decision in many of their cases.
This columnist was sued for libel by Dr. Walter Ramsahoye. I counter-sued Ramsahoye. Both cases came up the same time. Ramsahoye in front of Justice Barnes, mine in from of Justice Cummings- Edwards. Both concluded at the same time. Justice Barnes awarded Ramsahoye $2 million. Justice Cummings is still to give her judgement seven years now and in that time, Ramsahoye died. Did I win or did I lose? I guess I will never know.
Next, I will look at the vitally important letter the firm of Satram and Satram has sent to the Judicial Service Commission about the mode of selecting judges. God is dead, Marx is dead, Gandhi is dead, Mandela is dead, Gorbachev is dead and I’m not feeling too well myself.