Latest update March 29th, 2024 12:59 AM
Jan 16, 2012 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom
When you think of the source of electricity that powers your household appliances, you do not often think about the generating plants which feed electricity to the national grid.
You think of the electrical power that spins your blender or powers your computer as coming from a point in your home. The ultimate source of that electricity, however, is a power plant that feeds current into the national grid. But the identifiable unit that powers the appliance is some electrical point in the home.
So too it is with the mandate from the people. In the case of national elections or within voluntary organizations, the mandate of the elected comes via a constitution. It is the constitution that dictates how those elected are supposed to be selected and it is the constitution that governs the elections, be it for a new government or for an executive of a sporting body.
The mandate comes through the constitution and is sourced to those exercising their franchise. Thus, once an election, be it for a sporting organization or for a government, is constitutional then the elected executive of the sporting body or government can be rightly said to have a mandate.
It matters not whether 30% of the population refused to exercise their franchise. It matters not as in the case of some countries where more than half of the population eligible to vote, do not vote. So long as the elections are constitutional, regardless of the numbers that opted not to exercise their franchise, then the new government or executive can be lawfully and rightly said to have a mandate from the people and their membership.
There is a great deal of desperation in certain circles over the decision of the government to impose an Interim Management Committee on the administration of cricket. And as such, a way has to be found to legitimize what the government has done.
The claim that the government is acting in conformity with a decision of the courts has not passed muster. It cannot be sustained. And so now, new arguments are being put forward such as the existing Guyana Cricket Board not having a mandate. They do have a mandate by virtue of the elections which were held. But even if such a mandate was called into question, this does not give the government the right to impose an IMC on a voluntary association.
The Guyana Cricket Board is a private and voluntary association. No government can impose its will on that body.
The government itself had no mandate, in fact no lawful or moral authority to padlock the offices of the Guyana Cricket Board. This is trespassing, an invasion of private property and constitutes unlawful restraint of a voluntary organization from carrying out its functions.
The government ought to be brought to task for this illegal act, and the government needs to stop pursuing the agenda of the previous administration.
The new president should seek independent legal counsel, especially if he is convinced that there are persons within his government who would have represented a party or parties to any of the disputes involving the various Boards that administer cricket in Guyana.
If the government is serious about helping cricket, it should allow the various Boards to settle their own difference in due course because the GCB is itself comprised of Associate Boards, which in turn receive their mandates from clubs throughout Guyana. There is therefore a mechanism for this matter to be settled.
If the government wants to support cricket, it should invest in rehabilitating some of the community grounds, many of which are in a deplorable condition and which limit the opportunities of many young men and women.
It should cease forthwith, this opportunity to take over the administration of cricket which the public needs to be reminded began when it padlocked the gates to the former Guyana Softball Association.
One thing about this government is that it is predictable. It padlocked the gates to the Guyana Softball Association and the Ministry of Education repossessed the property. And of course as expected, it padlocked, this time unlawfully, the offices of the Guyana Cricket Board. It seems to be a padlock government.
It next made a bid for a takeover of the Georgetown Cricket Club and had a former West Indian cricketer not stood up and spoken out against this, the government may have bulldozed its way and taken over this facility.
There are many persons who may not admire the present administrators of cricket in Guyana. The government may also not admire them, but this does not give them the right to try to take over the administration of local cricket.
No attempt should therefore be made to try to provide any justification for this action on the part of the government. It is a rouge action which should be condemned because its implications for the rights of citizens are ominous.
THIS IDIOT TELLING GUYANA WE HAVE NO SAY IN THE 50% PROFIT SHARING AGREEMENT WE HAVE WITH EXXON.
Mar 29, 2024
By Rawle Toney Kaieteur Sports – After a series of outstanding performances in 2023, Tianna Springer, dubbed the ‘wonder girl’, is eagerly gearing up to compete in this year’s...Kaieteur News – Good Friday in Guyana is not what it used to be. The day has lost much of its solemnity. The one day... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – In the face of escalating global environmental challenges, water scarcity and... 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]