Latest update April 19th, 2024 12:59 AM
Nov 03, 2008 Letters
DEAR EDITOR,
This letter concerns the Justice Sector Reform. It is not that I am attempting to become a regular contributor to the letter columns of the Kaieteur News; however, your paper had published a previous letter in relation to solutions towards the possibility of an impending food crisis in Guyana.
The matter that I am writing this letter to you is in relation to a news article of the Sunday Chronicle of October 19, 2008, on page seven under the headline, “President announces full support for Justice Sector Reform”.
I read the article, and what the President said seems very impressive. I do not practice law, so I do not know what the Procurement Laws entail, neither do I know what the Financial Laws that had been put in place entail. Anyway, the President had stated in his address to the members of the legal fraternity (I quote) “Referring to concerns raised by acting Chancellor of the Judiciary, Justice Carl Singh, about the importance of the separation of powers of Executive from the Judiciary, President Jagdeo said although this is important, he believes more focus needs to be placed on confirming the two top posts in the Judiciary, the Chief Justice and Chancellor positions, as the persons in these posts are currently acting. He said this issue needs to be examined, as the persons in these posts are acting on agreement between the Government and the Opposition.” (Unquote)
It is my opinion that much of the public, like myself, would want to know what the Executive in relation to the Judiciary is.
However, the main point of my letter is in relation to the independence of the Judiciary, something that was much touted by the now governing political party while in the opposition for many years. To my mind, what was said by President Jagdeo underscores the reality that there is really no true independence of the Judiciary, since the Judiciary must rely on both the Government and the main political opposition to affirm such positions.
For some time, I had discussed the issue with many persons, including lawyers, judges, as well as magistrates both in Guyana and abroad, where I had made the suggestion of having a principal understanding of elections within the Judiciary, where the Chancellor is elected by way of the Judicature, who appoints the Chief Justice, then the Chief Justice makes the appointment of the Chief Magistrate, and the Chief Magistrate appoints the other magistrates, whereas the Chief Justice would appoint the roll of other judges.
Elections will be periodic, depending upon the neutral understanding to affix the period.
The Ombudsman is appointed by the Parliament to oversee all such matters within the mandate of the Ombudsman’s Office. In no way would such an arrangement compromise the executive powers of the President, but rather would create a situation where the Ombudsman’s Office would become more functional, so that it would not be called a rubber stamp.
In many ways, such an arrangement would relieve the President and the Cabinet of the arduous task of having to select a Chancellor and a Chief Justice. The Ombudsman is responsible to the Parliament by way of the National Assembly to carry out their function, and cannot be dismissed without the approval of the Parliament.
Such an arrangement would ensure independence of the Judiciary, and also reduce the element of conflict between the ruling party(s) and the opposition party(s).
It is understandable that such practices may have not been employed in other countries, but as things go, our President has a record of being the first to take initiatives in relation to many things, and this sort of thing would be a role model for the rest of the world.
All that is required is an act of Parliament to have it implemented as law, and the Judiciary as well as the other arms of the Judicature, including the Ombudsman’s Office, despite their executive powers, would be obliged to follow the rule of law as to the letter of the law in whatsoever regard, and that would be no exception.
I do think that this is an appropriate time to have such a law legislated, as it would merely require a simple majority in Parliament, even as it may pertain to amending the constitution to accommodate such. Generally, in many large countries when such laws are enacted, it would then require a two-thirds majority to change the law. Such would indeed ensure an independent Judiciary.
R. G. Venton
Please share this to every Guyanese including your house cats.
Apr 19, 2024
SportsMax – West Indies Women’s captain Hayley Matthews delivered a stellar all-round performance to lead her team to a commanding 113-run victory over Pakistan Women in the first One Day...Kaieteur News – For years, the disciples of Bharrat Jagdeo have woven a narrative of economic success during his tenure... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Waterfalls Magazine – On April 10, the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]