My attention was drawn to a letter to the press written by Mr. David Patterson,
Member of Parliament (MP). This letter consists of a most scathing attack on the
Public Procurement Commission (PPC). The Commission, apparently invoked
the ire of Mr. Patterson because they have failed to meet with him as per his
request, have not responded satisfactorily to his complaint, and worse yet, have
committed the unpardonable travesty of seeking legal advice! For the commission
of these heinous wrongs, Mr. Patterson lambasts their leadership, independence
and attributes to them a barrage of other personal and functional deficiencies,
including, immoral and ulterior motives.
The PPC is established by the Constitution. The Constitution mandates that “the
commission shall be independent, impartial and shall discharge its functions
fairly”. This constitutionally enshrined functional autonomy insulates this
Commission from the directions, dictates and control of any body or authority,
but at the same time, enjoins it to conduct its affairs with fairness.
It is the duty of every citizen to ensure that these independent constitutional
organs are allowed to function without threats of intimidation, unsubstantiated
public attacks and indeed free from every influence, whatsoever. I hold no brief
for the PPC, nor any other independent constitutional body, but for me silence is
not an option when they become the subject of unjustifiable and scurrilous
attacks.
I do not know the reason for the Chairperson of the PPC not responding to Mr.
Patterson’s request for a meeting. No doubt thousands of citizens, every day,
make appointments to meet public officials without success. Is this the basis to
launch the type of public tirade which Mr. Patterson has done to the PPC? I think
not. The PPC like any other person or organ has a constitutional right to seek
legal recourse. This is done on an everyday basis across the civilized democratic
world. Should the PPC be so condignly flayed in the public domain for exercising
this basic constitutional right? Is Mr. Patterson, a Member of Parliament, so
intolerant of the exercise of our constitutional freedoms? Even more importantly,
the functional autonomy which the Constitution confers upon the PPC, empowers
it to plan and organise its functional responsibilities as it sees fit and not at the
whim, fancy and caprice of Mr. Patterson.
In the circumstances, this vitriolic outpouring by Mr. Patterson must be
condemned and this constant bombardment of our independent institutions,
especially by politicians, be deprecated. The motives are clear as they are
abominable. They are intended to sap these agencies of their independence,
thereby compromising their ability to discharge their constitutional duties with
the requisite impartiality and fairness. Only a few days ago the Chairperson of the
Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM), another constitutionally independent
commission, was forced to report to the Guyana Police Force, a threat to her life
by Mr. Pattenson’s Parliamentary colleague, Coretta McDonald.
It is these independent constitutional agencies and their office-holders who
provide that vital constellation of checks and balances against abuse of power
which lubricates the constitutional machinery in a democratic society. So
profound are their functions and impact that they are styled the fourth arm of
government by modern constitutional democrats. When they become rogue or
compromised, the damage is equally pernicious. The immediate past Police
Service Commission’s attempts at political shenanigans readily come to mind.
It is already difficult in a small and divided population like ours to secure the
services of qualified independent persons to serve on these impartial bodies. If we
tolerate irresponsible and reckless attacks upon the few who are available,
causing them to shirk from accepting these responsibilities, it is the public good
that will eventually perish from their forbearance to serve. Lastly and in any
event, Mr. David Patterson ought to be one of the last of our citizens to clamour
for transparency and accountability. The allegations of corruption and
misconduct in public office against him, when he was a minister of Government,
are indeed legendary. Cases are pending both in our civil and criminal courts
implicating him in the most pungent schemes of this type. The duty is collectively
ours to protect our institutions from falling prey to these newly minted paragons
of virtue.
