Skip to main content

February 26,2017

Source

The PPP unanimously decided in about 1994-5 to propose to the Select Committee on Constitutional Reform established by the Sixth Parliament (1992-97) that a president should serve only two terms. I led the delegation, which included former President Donald Ramotar, and presented the PPP’s position.

The PPP presented the same position to the Constitutional Reform Commission (1999-2000), which I chaired. Its delegation was led by former President Donald Ramotar, then General Secretary. The two-term presidential limit, supported by the PNCR, was adopted by the Constitution Reform Commission and formed part of its recommendations. Article 90(3) of the Constitution was duly amended by Act No. 17 of 2001, unanimously passed in the National Assembly, to limit the presidential terms to two.

The Guyana Constitution can be amended in three ways. Some provisions require a simple majority, some a two-third majority and others, a referendum. An amendment to Article 90 requires a two-third majority.

In the Richardson Case in the High Court, (the ‘Third Term Case’) which was upheld by the Court of Appeal, (the written decision is not yet available), Chang CJ held that limiting the presidential term to two was not an amendment to Article 90 but a new provision of the Constitution. On that basis, Act No. 17 of 2001, which limited the right of the electorate, in whom democratic sovereignty lies, to choose who it wants to be its president, could not be passed merely by a two-third majority but required a referendum.

These legal matters relating to presidential term limits are of great jurisprudential interest and constitutional importance. But at the end of the day, if the CCJ upholds the decision of the Court of Appeal, in political terms, the issue becomes only of expensive inconvenience, namely, the holding of a referendum.

Since both the PPP and the PNC support a two-term presidential limit, and former President Bharrat Jagdeo has repeatedly said that he also does and has no interest in a third term, the outcome of a referendum would be a mere formality. It would be expected, of course, that the leadership of the PPP would resist internal calls, if made by orchestration or otherwise, to change its long-standing position in support of term limits.

In an article published on September 3, 2009, entitled ‘Term limits,’ I made a brief review as follows: “Most countries in Latin America impose term limits…Most countries in the Westminster system and in Europe, do not have term limits, but with a few exceptions, like Singapore and Malaysia, governments rotate between two main parties or coalitions…

“In recent years many countries, particularly in Africa, imposed term limits. Since the early 1990s 18 African presidents completed two terms in office. Eight retired while ten sought amendments to their constitutions to remain in office. Seven were successful. (Daniel Vencovsky: Presidential Term Limits in Africa, January 20, 2008). It is fair to conclude that the trend towards term limits for presidents is strong. It is perhaps irreversible in Latin America but not yet so in Africa although the unmistakable tendency is in that direction. For prime ministers in this region and elsewhere there is no such trend, nor demand.”

The mixed success of, but unmistakable trend towards, term limits, is demonstrated by the situation in Congo where President Kabila is attempting every ruse to hold on to power, but is being pressured to uphold the two term limit. This situation is yet to be resolved. On the other hand, giving a nod to reality, former British Prime Minister, David Cameron, undertook to serve only two terms. In the Caribbean, there are frequent changes of governments but no term limits. The political health of Guyana, with its past history and unwholesome struggle for ethnic dominance, needs at best a national unity government comprising both the main political parties, or at least, regularly rotating governments led by one or the other main parties. However, with immediate past governments in power for 28 and 23 years respectively, such an electoral outcome is not certain. Presidential term limits is, therefore, an absolute minimum.

T The unlimited right to hold the position of head of government will inevitably lead to authoritarianism and corruption. Wise leaders like Cheddi Jagan, Janet Jagan and Desmond Hoyte saw this and that is why they supported term limits. Both main political parties should, therefore, have no difficulty in supporting a referendum. For those who might be tempted, if the CCJ upholds the Court of Appeal, the Bolivia experience is salutary. The electorate recently rejected the attempt by the popular President Evo Morales of Bolivia to secure a constitutional amendment by way of a referendum to run for a third term.

If the Attorney General does not succeed in the CCJ, the government will have to do what it needs to – hold a referendum. The PPP would have no reason not to support it. A convenient time would be for a referendum to piggyback on local government elections in 2019 to save costs. The government may wish to complete the constitutional reform process by then so that if a referendum is required on other issues, it can be held at the same time.

Replies sorted oldest to newest

PPP support for term limits has not changed – Ramotar

-Ramkarran says referendum can easily settle matter as both parties hold same position.

February 27, 2017 Source

Former President Donald Ramotar says the PPP’s support of term limits has not changed and head of the 1999-2000 constitutional commission, Ralph Ramkarran  says that if necessary a referendum on the matter should pass easily as both major parties support   limits on presidential terms.

“If the Attorney General does not succeed in the CCJ, the Government will have to do what it needs to – hold a referendum. The PPP would have no reason not to support it,” Ramkarran said in his column in yesterday’s Sunday Stabroek.

Pointing to Ramkarran’s column, Ramotar stated that while he is not sure what the current position of the PPP will be on a referendum, the party’s position on having a term limit has not changed.

“It is true all that Ralph is saying in his article (yesterday) as far as the PPP’s position and support for a two term limit for presidents…I had worked with Ralph on this matter. I can’t remember the exact year but there was a time when billboards were being put up supporting a third term…I had condemned them because it was not in keeping with the party’s position on the matter…,” Ramotar asserted.

Donald Ramotar                      Ralph Ramkarran

“As far as I am aware, the PPP still holds true to these views and you must remember that it was not the PPP that was a party in this court matter so the focus should not be on the party. This was a private citizen. (Former President) Bharrat (Jagdeo) was the President when the changes (to the constitution introducing term limits) were made and he signed to them and that in itself showed that it was consistent with the party’s position…so nothing has changed,” he added.

Justice Ian Chang’s ruling in July 2015  – that the presidential term limit was not lawful as the constitutional change was not achieved via referendum- was based on a constitutional motion brought by private citizen Cedrick Richardson, who challenged the restriction created by amendments to Article 90 that were enacted in 2001 after the bipartisan constitution reform process.

Attorney-General Basil Williams and the then Speaker of the National Assembly Raphael Trotman were named as the defendants in that case. Following Justice Chang’s ruling, both defendants filed appeals.

By a split decision, the Guyana Court of Appeal on Wednesday upheld Justice Chang’s decision and the Attorney General has since signalled that the case will be taken to the Caribbean Court of Justice.

Following amendments, Article 90 of the Constitution states at Clause 2(a) that a person elected as president after the year 2000 “is eligible for re-election only once” and at Clause (3) that a person who acceded to the presidency after the year 2000 and served therein on a single occasion for not less than such period as may be determined by the National Assembly “is eligible for election as president only once.”

Richardson claimed that Act No 17 of 2001, which was passed by a two-thirds majority of all elected members of the National Assembly to enable the term-limits, “unconstitutionally curtails and restricts” his sovereign and democratic rights and freedom as a qualified elector “to elect the person of former president Bharrat Jagdeo” as executive president.

Leader of the Opposition and twice-elected President, Jagdeo yesterday told Stabroek News that he will wait until today to discuss his and the party’s view on the matter, at the PPP’s weekly press conference.

The former President had repeatedly distanced himself from the case and had publicly said that he had no intention of running for office again.

Before both the 2011 and 2015 General and Regional Elections Jagdeo had echoed his stance of not wanting any government office bearing status but that he would use his clout to galvanize support for then presidential candidate Ramotar.

However, he made an about face when Ramotar lost the 2015 elections and became Opposition Leader after assuring that while his name was on the party’s list of candidates, he would not be seeking any parliamentary positions.

Following the PPP’s congress last December, he was elected as General Secretary of the party.

Ramkarran explained that back in 1994/5, the PPP had unanimously decided to propose to the then Select Committee on Constitutional Reform that a president should only serve two terms. He said that he led the delegation which included Ramotar and presented the PPP’s position.

“The PPP presented the same position to the Constitutional Reform Commission (1999-2000), which I chaired. Its delegation was led by former President Donald Ramotar, then General Secretary. The two-term presidential limit, supported by the PNCR, was adopted by the Constitution Reform Commission and formed part of its recommendations. Article 90(3) of the Constitution was duly amended by Act No. 17 of 2001, unanimously passed in the National Assembly, to limit the presidential terms to two.”

Pointing out that the Guyana Constitution can be amended in three ways; that some provisions require a simple majority, some a two-third majority and others, a referendum he stated that an amendment to Article 90 requires a two-third majority.

Ramkarran said that in the Richardson Third Term Case, which was upheld by the Court of Appeal last week,  then Chief Justice Chang held that limiting the presidential term to two was not an amendment to Article 90 but a new provision of the Constitution. It was on that basis, Act No. 17 of 2001, which limited the right of the electorate was deemed by Justice Chang to require not a two-thirds majority but a referendum.

Ramkarran said that if the CCJ upholds the decision of the Court of Appeal, in political terms, “the issue becomes only of expensive inconvenience, namely, the holding of a referendum.”

The Senior Counsel and former longstanding executive of the PPP believes that since both the PPP and the PNCR support a two-term presidential limit,  coupled with the fact that  Jagdeo has repeatedly said that he also does and has no interest in a third term, the outcome of a referendum would be a mere formality.

He said that the present leadership of the PPP would be expected to resist internal calls to change its longstanding position in support of term limits and rationalized that unlimited right to hold the position of head of government has the propensity to lead to authoritarian leaders and corruption.

“The unlimited right to hold the position of head of government will inevitably lead to authoritarianism and corruption. Wise leaders like Cheddi Jagan, Janet Jagan and Desmond Hoyte saw this and that is why they supported term limits. Both main political parties should, therefore, have no difficulty in supporting a referendum.

“If the Attorney General does not succeed in the CCJ, the Government will have to do what it needs to – hold a referendum. The PPP would have no reason not to support it”, Ramkarran asserted, while advising  that government could have the constitutional amendment process completed in time to piggyback off of the 2019 Local Government Elections and have all other requisite issues on the referendum at the same time so as to save money and other resources.

A number of Jagdeo’s supporters have openly tried to promote him for a third term and analysts say there still be could be efforts made at the recently elected Central Committee for a change in the party’s position.

For Ramotar, he does not think that the party’s members would agree for a change in their longstanding policy on the matter but is not sure on the referendum; a move he believes could see party supporters voting in favour of the third term.

“If there is a referendum at this time it would be anyone’s guess as to the outcome, but I think that given the current state of affairs and how persons are aggrieved with the current government, people would very much vote in favour of having no limits because they will see it as a decision in getting Jagdeo to run again for a third term,” he posited.

“It is very ticklish so people might not look at the bigger picture as for what it means for the future…,” he added.

Django
yuji22 posted:

"In the Caribbean, there are frequent changes of governments but no term limits"

In the Caribbean with the exception of Trinidad and Tobago,there are no Ethnic based Political Parties,different strokes for Guyana taking in to consideration the Ethnic make up.

Django
Django posted:
yuji22 posted:

"In the Caribbean, there are frequent changes of governments but no term limits"

In the Caribbean with the exception of Trinidad and Tobago,there are no Ethnic based Political Parties,different strokes for Guyana taking in to consideration the Ethnic make up.

What does ethnic makeup have to do with this ?

Free and Fair Elections and election results are the democratic will of the people. End of story. The Caribbean supported a Black Led Dictoatorship for 28 years while being silent. How come all of a sudden ethnic makeup pops up ?

Enough of this BS. Let us have free and fair elections and who wins win. If an individual is popular and steps down after his or her two terms then so be it and if they want to run again after being out for a period of five years, then so be it.

Enough of this BS talk. The other Caribbean countries have ZERO term limits. Yes, ZERO.

It is all of this BS talk about terms which keep back Guyana. The courts have ruled and let it stand. If the PNC wants terms then let them have a referendum and let the people decide. As Ralph indicated, this can be done at the next Local Election in 2019.

I am sick and tired of hearing about terms. The AFC/PNC is scared shyte of Bharat winning a third term. He is very popular and the only one capable of putting Guyana back on track after these AFC/PNC scumbags are on a path to destruction.

Let us not have this lil boy BS talk about corruption, it cannot be proven and any charges will be trumped up and thrown out of court.

Yuji22

FM
Last edited by Former Member

Dem boys seh: Be careful what you wish for. Granger can hold a referendum in 2019 and then explain that GECOM doesn't have enough funds remaining to conduct general elections in 2020. Burnham had held a referendum in 1978 and postponed general elections to 1980, giving his government two more years for one term. 

FM

"The unlimited right to hold the position of head of government will inevitably lead to authoritarianism and corruption. Wise leaders like Cheddi Jagan, Janet Jagan and Desmond Hoyte saw this and that is why they supported term limits. Both main political parties should, therefore, have no difficulty in supporting a referendum."


Well bhai Yugi,

it appears your idea have proven the wise leaders [quoted above] are fools.

nah suh.

Granger should throw out the agreement brokered by the Carter Center to select GECOM Chairman,stick what the unprogressive 1980 Constitution.

Django
Last edited by Django
Django posted:
yuji22 posted:

"In the Caribbean, there are frequent changes of governments but no term limits"

In the Caribbean with the exception of Trinidad and Tobago,there are no Ethnic based Political Parties,different strokes for Guyana taking in to consideration the Ethnic make up.

What does ethnic makeup have to do with term limits? Do you see this problem in America? We have term limits here. Early Monday mannin' you start with this race thing. You like when dem bais harass you nah?

FM
Prashad posted:

Django you should be chained.

Prash,if one the acts in the Constitution brokered for Electorial Reforms,which is a path to true Democracy is thrown out,then all the rest is no good.

That's my take.

Django
skeldon_man posted:
Django posted:
yuji22 posted:

"In the Caribbean, there are frequent changes of governments but no term limits"

In the Caribbean with the exception of Trinidad and Tobago,there are no Ethnic based Political Parties,different strokes for Guyana taking in to consideration the Ethnic make up.

What does ethnic makeup have to do with term limits? Do you see this problem in America? We have term limits here. Early Monday mannin' you start with this race thing. You like when dem bais harass you nah?

Bro take a good look Guyana is not ole USA,when it comes to politics.

Django
Django posted:
skeldon_man posted:
Django posted:
yuji22 posted:

"In the Caribbean, there are frequent changes of governments but no term limits"

In the Caribbean with the exception of Trinidad and Tobago,there are no Ethnic based Political Parties,different strokes for Guyana taking in to consideration the Ethnic make up.

What does ethnic makeup have to do with term limits? Do you see this problem in America? We have term limits here. Early Monday mannin' you start with this race thing. You like when dem bais harass you nah?

Bro take a good look Guyana is not ole USA,when it comes to politics.

I am looking at your statement in general, regardless of the country. The British left Guyana with this problem. The people did not come by it just yesterday.

FM
skeldon_man posted:
Django posted:
 

Bro take a good look Guyana is not ole USA,when it comes to politics.

I am looking at your statement in general, regardless of the country. The British left Guyana with this problem. The people did not come by it just yesterday.

Skelly,maybe to some my statements may seem biased,I am more in the middle and call spade a spade,seriously i am for all the people.

The British left 50 yrs ago that's is almost a generation,yet the Country is divided due to political leanings.

Django
Last edited by Django

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×