THE APNU+AFC coalition Administration has announced through President David Granger that it will appoint the Public Procurement Commission and the Local Government Commission this month. These commissions have constitutional responsibilities and are expected to discharge same within the confines of the law. The Guyana Constitution is the nation’s supreme law, and what is currently being done by moving to appoint these important commissions ought to be seen as a catalyst in ensuring laws are upheld in the spirit and to the letter.In the case of the Local Government Commission, it will be tasked with the duties of having overarching responsibility for the local government organs, which are the municipalities and the Neighbourhood Democratic Councils; and among those responsibilities would be employment and discipline of officers at certain levels. The Procurement Commission’s responsibility will see this institution managing state contracts to the tune of approximately 75 percent of the National Budget.
There will be tremendous responsibility on both commissions, evident in continuous controversies in the local government and procurement sectors. Partisan politics has overshadowed the importance of both sectors, and moreso has denied the nation the opportunity of seeing its Constitution at work.
It need not be forgotten that both commissions were made possible after protest and street marches in Georgetown that emanated from the 1997 General and Regional Elections. The demand was that government be inclusive, transparent and accountable. A Constitutional Reform Commission (CRC) was established as a result, and that body travelled the length and breadth of Guyana, listening to the citizens articulate their fears and concerns. From this input, the CRC placed before the National Assembly a final document that had, among other things, the establishment of these commissions, which in 2001 resulted in a number of amendments to the Constitution.
Over the period of the last 14 years, the then Opposition was clamouring for the appointment of these commissions, and successive PPP/C administrations found various reasons not to appoint them. The elections in May 2015 have seen those who were in the Opposition entering the Executive, and the APNU+AFC Administration gradually moving towards appointing these commissions. The PPP/C, now in opposition, has taken a robust and militant position in demanding that the APNU+AFC move with alacrity to have the commissions in place within the shortest possible time.
While in the Executive for those 14 years, the PPP/C had refused to respond to public demands for the operationalising of this constitutional responsibility in appointing the commissions. It is not lost on society that, within a year of being placed in the Opposition benches in the National Assembly, the party’s leadership has moved to give the society the impression that when it was in Executive it was compliant with the constitution and the APNU+AFC administration has been moving too slow in doing so.
The hypocrisy aside, it needs to be said that a role of the Opposition is to keep the Executive on its toes and hold it accountable to good standards of governance; what it demanded of the Executive when in the Opposition; and promises made during the campaign and the programmes outlined in its manifesto.
At the same time, the political groupings in the APNU+AFC Administration, when they were in the Opposition, fought tooth and nail to have these commissions in place. Being in the seat of the Executive, they need to do everything to ensure the commitment given by President Granger to have the commissions established within the stipulated time. Continuous trading of allegations, some not without merit, that procedures and laws are being disregarded, the procurement system is being abused and its guidelines ignored, coupled with problematic management in some local government authorities, are hard to ignore. Growth and development in a society and the social cohesion of its people, especially as diverse as ours, will be elusive where it is felt and/or seen that public offices, elected and appointed, are only pursued for self-serving ends, and not that of protecting and enhancing the welfare of the people, their institutions and resources.
