GEORGETOWN, Guyana, CMC – The Guyana government says it is working to complete its written responses to questions raised by the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Committee (HRC) earlier this week.
In addition, Georgetown reminds us that the constitutional framework of a democratic country like Guyana prohibits the executive from conducting investigations into high-profile matters such as corruption.
The HRC was established to monitor the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). It is a body of independent experts that monitors State parties’ implementation of the ICCPR.
Earlier this week, Governance Minister Gail Teixeira told the HRC that no one had lodged a police complaint about the claims made in a US Vice News report regarding the lack of investigation into Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo’s alleged corruption.
“There is no follow-up on it because there was no police report made by Vice News or anybody else, and so the police cannot investigate without some form of report or complaint,” she told the UN Human Rights Committee, adding that Jagdeo had publicly responded to those allegations in media that had carried the issue.
Speaking at his weekly news conference on Thursday, Jagdeo expressed concern that Teixeira was not given enough time to respond appropriately to the questions posed by the HRC.
“The problem is that if you ask 70 questions and don’t give us time to respond, ” Gail Teixeira complained. You asked all these questions. People hear all these questions, but they should also hear the answers…
“We’re working on that [report] now, and the responses have to go soon … every one of these issues we’ll address in writing, and we will ask them to publish our responses to the questions – we will publish them too,” Jagdeo added.
He also questioned the failure of specific local non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to make their shadow submissions to the committee publicly.
“[There are] not many countries that allow individual complaints … The US and the UK do not. We have allowed that to happen. We want to see all the submissions for transparency purposes. You can see our submission from the Government. This is a body that enhances great transparency, so it should be transparent on how it works, too,” Jagdeo said.
He said that some of the issues raised by the HRC were similar to the “unsubstantiated narrative” by opposition legislators, who have accused the present administration of wrongdoings since 2020.
“They [the opposition] can’t find resonance here in Guyana; nobody pays attention to them … so they go to the international bodies,” he said.
Jagdeo insisted that all the allegations and concerns brought up before the Government had comprehensively addressed the HRC in its third International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) report.
In 2020, Guyana was asked to submit its ICCPR report, which was subsequently submitted in 2021. The report detailed the Government’s advances in civil and political rights.
“We’ve addressed issues of corruption, election rigging, etc., all of which are addressed in our main submission,” he added.
Meanwhile, Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs Anil Nandlall, SC, has said that the constitutional framework of a democratic country like Guyana prohibits the executive from conducting investigations into high-profile matters such as corruption.
He said that this power is delegated to legally instituted semi-autonomous bodies as he responded to remarks made by the United States representative on the HRC, Laurence Helfer, regarding the Guyana government’s alleged failure to investigate corruption reports involving the vice president, judiciary, and police.
However, Nandlall said that Helfer’s question validates his misunderstanding and unacquaintance with Guyana’s legal architecture.
“You have the Guyana Police Force, you have the Auditor General’s Office, you have the Guyana Revenue Authority…All these agencies are not government agencies; they are state agencies. The people who are asking these questions are unacquainted with and not educated about our governance structure,” Nandlall said.
He said that if the head of state had to investigate the judiciary, the country would be in turmoil, and the Government would be severely criticized.
“You will hear…that the executive interferes with the judiciary, that [the] executive is pressuring the judiciary. You will hear about undermining and violating the doctrine of separation of powers…Yet you have a person who doesn’t understand these ramifications.”
Nandlall challenged Helfer’s assertion that the public was frustrated with the non-investigation of corruption claims.
“Which segment of the public is frustrated by this allegation?” he questioned, adding that only members of the main coalition opposition, A Partnership for National Unity and Alliance for Change (APNU+AFC), are pursuing these allegations in the public domain, driven by political self-interest. He said that this same political tactic was unleashed pre-2015, leading up to the general and regional elections.
and then 