‘Illegitimate Without the People’s Say’: SC Ralph Ramkarran Urges Constitution Reform Commission to Place Referendum on Governance System on Agenda

By Antonio Dey | HGP Nightly News |

GEORGETOWN, GUYANA — Senior Counsel and former Speaker of the National Assembly Ralph Ramkarran is calling on the Constitution Reform Commission (CRC) to recommend a national referendum allowing the Guyanese electorate to directly determine their preferred system of government.

Delivering remarks during a constitutional reform consultation with the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC), Ramkarran argued that the 1980 Constitution—which established Guyana’s current executive presidential system—was promulgated without a democratic plebiscite, leaving its governance structure historically compromised.

To establish genuine democratic legitimacy and resolve long-standing political friction, Ramkarran contends that both the existing executive presidential model and an alternative Westminster-style parliamentary system should be formally placed before the public in a national vote.

The Question of Legitimacy: The 1980 Constitution

Ramkarran traced Guyana’s constitutional challenges back to the promulgation of the 1980 Constitution under the Forbes Burnham administration:

• Absence of Popular Choice: Ramkarran highlighted that while the 1978 referendum paved the way for constitutional drafting, citizens were never granted a direct vote on whether they wanted an executive presidency or preferred to retain the parliamentary model inherited at independence in 1966.
• Ongoing Illegitimacy: The former Speaker maintained that until the electorate is granted the opportunity to vote on how executive authority is structured, the 1980 system will continue to face questions of fundamental political legitimacy.

“My view is unless the people of Guyana have an opportunity to have a say in that constitution which still exist today, it will remain illegitimate.”

Executive Presidency vs. Westminster System

Outlining the choices that should be presented to the electorate, the Senior Counsel compared the mechanics of executive authority:

• The Westminster Model: Under this structure, a non-executive President performs ceremonial duties as Head of State, while executive power is exercised by a Prime Minister and Cabinet directly accountable to the National Assembly. A defeat on a vote of confidence leads to immediate parliamentary dissolution or government reconstitution.
• The Executive Presidential Model: The current system merges Head of State and Head of Government into an Executive President who wields broad constitutional powers and is not a member of the legislative floor.
• No Imposed Model: Ramkarran emphasized that he is not advocating an automatic return to the Westminster framework; rather, he is urging that both models be drafted clearly and submitted to a national vote.

“The first objective is to have the current Constitution Reform Commission to have on its agenda the issue of referendum… It can only be placed on the agenda by proposing to the Government that a new governmental system or structure be put to the electorate for approval.”

GECOM Oversight and Democratic Trust

Beyond the executive office, Ramkarran pointed to the structure of the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) as another urgent area requiring constitutional review:

• Appointment of Commissioners: Ramkarran reiterated that the current Carter-Price formula—which balances three government-aligned and three opposition-aligned commissioners under an independent chairman—has created structural impasses, as seen in disputes over opposition commissioner tenure.
• Electoral Integrity: He argued that reforming how commissioners are appointed and removed is critical to restoring public trust and guaranteeing the independent administration of general and regional elections.

With the Constitution Reform Commission conducting public and institutional engagements across Guyana, Ramkarran’s proposals place the separation of powers and popular sovereignty at the center of the constitutional reform debate.