Guyana is still a ‘Co-operative’ Republic
-Referendum needed to change name

Stabroek News
May 18, 2003

Related Links: Articles on Constitution Reform Commission
Letters Menu Archival Menu


Despite the near extinction of the co-operative movement, the country’s formal name is still the Co-operative Republic of Guyana and only a referendum can make the change as recommended by the Constitution Reform Commission.
The government is yet to initiate the procedure which the CRC recommended and which the National Assembly unanimously accepted to change the name as stated at Article 1 of the constitution from the Co-operative Republic of Guyana to the Republic of Guyana.
For this to be effected, the provisions of Article 164(2) require the issue to be submitted to a referendum. The result of the referendum then has to be confirmed by the National Assembly. The bill then has to be submitted to the President for his assent not later than six months but not earlier than two months after the National Assembly has passed it.
Meanwhile President Jagdeo has been incorrectly describing himself as “President of the Republic of Guyana” and this was how he signed the communique on May 6, after his meeting with PNCR leader, Robert Corbin.
The other recommendation, which the National Assembly accepted, is that the constitution should be re-written in people friendly language.
It was recognised by both the CRC and the parliamentary oversight committee that re-writing the constitution is a specialised skill and the expertise may have to be obtained outside of Guyana. Stabroek News understands that now that the parliamentary committee on constitution reform has been established, it will be one of the first issues that it would address.
Meanwhile President Jagdeo and Corbin have agreed that the fundamental rights bill would be re-introduced in the National Assembly within two months during which the government would consult with the religious community.
This bill was approved by the last parliament but President Jagdeo withheld his assent following representations by the religious community.
The religious community was concerned that banning discrimination on the ground of a person’s sexual orientation could lead to the entrenching of same sex marriage as a fundamental right.

Site Meter