HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE TAKES UP REPORT OF GUYANA ON COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS

Press Release
HR/CT/557

HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE TAKES UP REPORT OF GUYANA ON COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS

The Human Rights Committee met this afternoon to review the second periodic report of Guyana on its compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The Head of Guyana’s delegation, Roger Luncheon, reaffirmed his country’s commitment to the Covenant and noted that the rights outlined in that instrument were guaranteed in Guyana by law, irrespective of race, gender, creed, religion and class.

He noted that despite having achieved independence in 1966, it was only eight years ago that the Guyanese had been allowed to elect a Government of their choice in free and fair elections. The present People’s Political Party/Civic Government was the choice of the people. Now all basic freedoms and rights were guaranteed.

Continuing, he said the arrival of the report some 13 years after its due date had placed both the Committee and his administration in an invidious position, in the sense that the political environment in the country had undergone considerable changes since 1987. Full explanations of the present situation were more relevant than the issues in the 1982-1987 report. If such explanations were to be made, it would facilitate a better understanding of the way the people, the society, the legislature and the judiciary saw the Covenant in its entirety.

During the meeting, members of the Committee posed questions and made comments on the report. Experts noted that in many cases, the responses given by Guyana’s delegation to issues raised by the Committee were not what had been expected and were often vague. It was hoped that the delegation would provide the appropriate responses when the Committee next met on Monday. Members also underscored that the report itself was not extensive in its answers to the Committee’s questionnaire, and contained gaps and theoretical statements related to the Constitution.

Several experts drew attention to various violations of the Covenant’s provisions. One expert stated that torture, in particular, was a general practice in Guyana and that there were many cases to testify to that. He cited the case of Mark Brown, who was taken to a private room by police and abused. More specific information on such incidents and the measures that were being taken to address them were requested.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. on Monday, 27 March, to continue its consideration of Guyana’s compliance with the Covenant.

Human Rights Committee - 2 - Press Release HR/CT/557 1827th Meeting (PM) 24 March 2000

Committee Work Programme

The Human Rights Committee met this afternoon to begin its consideration of the second periodic report of Guyana on compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR/C/GUY/99/2).

In compliance with article 2 of the Covenant (equality before the law and courts), the report states that the rights recognized in the Covenant are guaranteed by law without distinction to race, colour, sex, language, religion political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. The Government of Guyana has progressively adopted legislation to enhance those laws already in existence.

With respect to birth, the report states, the Children Born Out of Wedlock (removal of Discrimination) Act (1983) is one example of legislation which provides the same legal rights and legal status for children born out of wedlock as those born in wedlock. This act, however, is now being revisited by the Ministry of Labour, Human Services and Social Security, in view of the present difficulties encountered in its full implementation.

The report goes on to say that while there are still perceived elements of discrimination in society, this is not sanctioned by any legislative measures. While it may be observed that a particular race or ethnic group is concentrated in certain parts of the country, that may be explained by the country’s history as a colony and the pattern of early settlements.

Covering compliance with article 3 (gender equality), the report notes that while men and women are considered equal as stated in the country’s Constitution, there is still a disparity in women’s participation in public life and their representation at key levels as compared to men in the same categories.

Regarding article 6 (the right to life), the report states that the death sentence can be imposed only by a judge of the High Court after trial and only for the offences of murder and treason. It also cannot be imposed on a pregnant woman or anyone under the age of 18 years. The President is empowered to grant a pardon to any offender or to have the death sentence commuted to life imprisonment. A person convicted of murder and sentenced to death also has the right of appeal to the Guyana Court of Appeal.

The report goes on to say that in every case where a person is sentenced to death and admitted into prison, he is informed of his right to appeal against that sentence, and facilities are provided whereby the appeal is made within the specified time. Where all appeals have been exhausted and the sentence of death is upheld, the prisoner may, by petition, seek clemency through the Advisory Council on the Prerogative of Mercy. That body meets frequently to consider such petitions and advise the President whether he should use his executive powers in the granting of clemency to the petitioner.

According to the report, 46 prisoners were sentenced to death by the Supreme Court of Guyana during the period January 1981 to December 1986. Appeals were made against all the sentences and convictions. Those appeals were heard by the Court of Appeals. Twenty-three were dismissed while the conviction and sentence were upheld. Fourteen appeals were allowed and the convictions and sentences set aside, five appeals were allowed and retrials ordered while another was also allowed and the sentence commuted to life imprisonment. In yet another appeal, the sentence was commuted to 15 years imprisonment. Two persons died while awaiting the results of their appeals.

The report goes on to say that the 23 persons whose sentences and convictions were affirmed by the Court of Appeal petitioned the Advisory Council on the Prerogative of Mercy for clemency. Nine of the death sentences were subsequently commuted to life imprisonment while five were upheld. The decisions on the remaining nine were taken after 1986, which is outside the time-frame of the present report.

While noting that Guyana has presented a commendable record of protecting the individual’s right to life within a legal framework, the report draws attention to the fact that there were, however, a number of undocumented cases of shootings by plain-clothes policemen. Persons shot were labeled “wanted criminals”.

Regarding article 7 (prohibition of torture and inhuman treatment), the report says that Guyana’s Constitution provides laws that dictate the conduct of law enforcement personnel which have been enacted. Basically, any member of the police force who is guilty of any unlawful or unnecessary use of authority commits an offence against discipline and is liable to such punishment as may be imposed upon him by the Commissioner of Police or disciplinary authority. Depending on the gravity of the offence, sanctions range from reprimand to dismissal. Police officers can also be brought before the courts when there is evidence that a criminal offence has been committed.

That position, continues the report, is supported by the Defence Act, which states that “every person subject to military law under the Act who is guilty of disgraceful conduct of a cruel, indecent, or unnatural kind, shall, on conviction by Court martial, be liable to imprisonment for two years or any less punishment prescribed by the Act”.

There are also prison rules which govern the action of personnel in such institutions, the report notes. According to the law, no prison officer shall strike a prisoner except in self-defense, or in defense of another. At all times, the treatment of prisoners shall be such as to encourage their self-respect and a sense of personal responsibility. Violations of those rules by a prison officer can lead to sanctions against the defaulter, and depending on the gravity of the offence, penalties ranging from reprimand to dismissal. Where the offence is grave enough to be classified as a criminal one, the matter is then decided by the courts.

The report goes on to say, nevertheless, that the extent to which the aforementioned provisions are enforced remains unconfirmed, as record-keeping for the reporting period was poor. It should also be noted that no authority was found that protects inmates of hospitals (general or psychiatric) from the administration of drugs which could result in prolonged periods of pain, or experimentation with drugs using human patients as subjects. There have been no reported cases of persons being used in experiments or being administered drugs which result in prolonged periods of pain.

The reports also state that corporal and other punishment in schools have not yet been addressed by lawmakers.

Addressing article 8 (slavery and forced labour), the report states that brief periods of community service have been imposed by the courts on first offenders as an alternative to imprisonment. Criminal offenders, however, are no longer sentenced to hard labour but a period of imprisonment during which work is considered an integral part of the rehabilitation process. The broad objective of the prisoner's rehabilitative work programme is to develop in him or her the desire to engage in productive endeavours by which he or she may gain marketable skills that could be translated into income upon release from prison.

The report goes on to state, however, that while no person in Guyana is required to perform forced labour, during the period under review, civil servants were asked to work at Hope Estate, a coconut plantation outside Georgetown. There were no explicit orders to civil servants, but many felt that their jobs would be jeopardized if they did not comply with "requests" to work at the plantation.

Regarding article 9 (right to liberty and security of person), the report states that during the period under consideration there were a number of arbitrary arrests. These were largely politically motivated and were directed at members of the then existing opposition parties and their perceived supporters. Prominent among those arrested were supporters of the Working Peoples' Alliance.

Addressing compliance with article 10, which states that all persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person, the report states that there is a problem of overcrowding in prisons which the authorities have endeavoured to address. For the period under review, conditions were cramped and segregation between remand and convicted female prisoners was not always possible. It should also be noted that the Georgetown Prison was constructed over 150 years ago and has not expanded to keep pace with the increasing population of inmates.

The report goes on to say that despite every effort to ensure the well-being of prisoners, there are still unfortunate deaths in prisons, many of which have resulted from chronic illnesses which the prisoners suffered when they were admitted to prison.

Regarding article 12 (liberty of movement), the report states that there are derogations from that principle such as a court order restraining a person from leaving the jurisdiction. Persons who are contracted to the Government also have limited movement with respect to overseas travel.

Addressing compliance with article 17 (interference in private life), the report states that during the review period, there were a number of searches under the provisions of the national security act, which were considered to be without basis and carried out with unnecessary force by members of the police force. Searches were frequent and extensive and directed mainly at opposition figures and their supporters in the People's Progressive Party and the Working People’s Alliance. In many cases, searches were carried out without a warrant and valuable items were reported missing by householders.

Regarding compliance with article 19 (freedom of expression), the report states that the early 1980s were characterized by a State media dominated by the People's National Congress and discriminatory practices against opposition publications. The Government at the time was the sole importer of newsprint and used that position to limit its supply to others, thus leading to constraints on the publication of views other than those of the Government. Libel suits have also been used as tools to limit the freedom of expression of opposition publications. Also, between 1982 and 1983, there were approximately eight unexpected dismissals. That figure included University of Guyana lecturers and secondary school teachers who were known to have voiced opinions that were critical of the People's National Congress Government.

Regarding article 20 (propaganda for war), the report states that prohibition of that practice has not been found in the statutes. However, the advocacy of national, racial and religious hatred which may constitute incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence has proven to be disastrous to the nation. It has thus been recommended that the Public Order Acting Deputy Spokesman be amended to include laws which would make such advocacy a crime.

Addressing compliance with article 21 (right to peaceful assembly), the report draws attention to the fact that during the review period, opposition parties and religious organizations with a political bias had their meetings disrupted by different tactics, including harassment by police while granting permission to hold meetings, and the actual break-up of such gatherings by thugs.

Regarding article 25 (the right to take part in the conduct of public affairs), the report underscores that the period under review was a questionable one in respect of free and fair elections under the People's National Congress regime. In 1988, members of a Mission of Inquiry into Political Freedom in Guyana were refused entry into Guyana. That mission, which had been invited by churches, trade unions, the Guyana Bar Association and the Guyana Human Rights Association, comprised Americas Watch, the United Kingdom Parliamentary Human Rights Group and the International Commission of Jurists. At the general election in 1985, there were numerous allegations of rigging; when the People's National Congress retained power once again, it was generally felt that the results were compromised.

In conclusion, the report notes that no specific body of laws has been enacted to protect the interests of specific minorities with the exception of the Amerindians; to protect inmates of general and mental hospitals from being used without their knowledge and consent in medical experiments; or to regulate the infliction of corporal punishment on school children. The report also states the review period was a difficult one, with number of oppressive practices in the political, economic and social life of the country under the People's National Congress regime. That increasingly changed when it became obvious to the then administration that the country could not survive alone and needed the goodwill of the international community.

The report also outlines compliance with articles 1, 4, 5, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 22, 23, 24, 26 and 27 of the Covenant.

Statement by Government

ROGER LUNCHEON, Head of Delegation of Guyana, reaffirmed his country’s commitment to the principles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In the current report, the Government had attempted to show compliance with the civil and political rights of the instrument by highlighting the legislation that existed to protect the people of Guyana.

He said that despite having achieved its independence in 1966, it was only eight years ago that Guyanese were allowed to finally elect a Government of their choice in free and fair elections by exercising their right to free choice. The present People’s Political Party/Civic Government was the choice of the people. Now all basic freedoms and rights were guaranteed. The Government had also made every attempt to foster freedom of expression. The proliferation of radio, television and academic institutions was testimony of the Government’s resolve in that area.

He said the human rights in the Covenant were guaranteed in Guyana by law irrespective of race, gender, creed, religion and class. The report, which covered the period 1982 to 1987, would be reviewed over the next two days and he hoped the advice given by the Human Rights Committee in that time would be useful in informing national efforts to ensure civil and political rights.

One of the questions raised by the Committee concerned the steps that had been taken to ensure implementation of its views on the violation of the Covenant in cases under the Optional Protocol. It had also requested clarification on the measures that would be taken to ensure that the death sentence would not carried out prior to the consideration by the Committee of a communication alleging violation of the Covenant.

Responding to those issues, he said that the Government had tendered a report dealing with such matters. Regarding the unfortunate incident which took place in 1999 when the death sentence was carried out prior to consideration by the Committee of a communication, he said specific measures had been put in place to ensure that communications from the Committee would now be directed to the national authority responsible for initiating events leading to hanging. In the case cited, the communication from the Committee was handed to the Director of the Prison after the hanging of the convicted person because it had gone to the Office of the President first.

Referring to the case of A.S. Yassen and N. Thomas versus Guyana, he said he would need to be more fully briefed on the matter. But the case was currently before the Court of Appellate Jurisdiction of Guyana and was currently unresolved.

Responding to a question on the proposed new Constitution and the protection of Covenant Rights, he said the reform process had not been completed and a new Constitution had therefore not been promulgated. There were certain irreversible steps, however, that dealt with the protection of Covenant rights. Copies of the report of the Constitutional Reform Commission would be made available to the Committee.

He advised the Committee that at this point in time the ruling by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council had not caused the Government to withdraw its reservation to the Optional Protocol. Those considerations had still not been concluded.

He said the second report indicated a trend of increased women’s participation in education, the workplace, public service and political life. The constitutional reform process had made it sure that it would no longer be a trend but a fact established in the Constitution and protected by related provisions.

Turning to the prohibition of torture and degrading treatment, he said that the delegation had circulated the legislative acts dealing with the Police Complaints Authority and the work of the Ombudsman, as well as on the work done in addressing the inadequacies of the Authority. The submissions from the public to that Authority and their requests for hearings and investigations by the Police Commissioner had not lived up to the expectations of many. The Authority had come under the constitutional reform process and recommendations had been made to strengthen their role in addressing those issues.

The constitutional reform process had also directed their attention to the office and activities of the Ombudsman, he continued. The Ombudsman and the Ombudsman Act were subjected to a deep and thorough review. With respect to the allegations of torture and abuse of detainees, such allegations continued to be made since the last report. Where investigations had taken place, their results had led, in a small number of cases, to disciplinary action taken against those in the police force identified as perpetrators. There had not been any criminal convictions of any perpetrators and no compensation ordered by courts in such matters.

He then addressed matters relating to the liberty and security of person, treatment of prisoners and other detainees and the right to a fair trial. Allegations of delays in excess of three to four years were a common occurrence. That was a problem, which affected the administration of justice in Guyana. The state of preparedness of the administrative ministries and other bodies involved had not been able to match the demands made by the State prosecution arm. As a result, there had been an increase in court matters delayed due to that mismatch between demand and ability to respond.

That situation had led to two proposed initiatives, one of which had already been tabled in the National Assembly, namely the empowerment of lay magistrates. The constitutional reform process was addressing the issue of part-time and temporary judges to facilitate an immediate impact on the delay. He added that in those few instances when developments had led to writs for habeus corpus being filed, all had been successful.

With regard to the protection of the rights of detainees, he said that those rights and the conduct of the police force were properly addressed in Guyana’s laws. Also, access to legal counsel was enshrined in the laws. When aspects of confessions seem not to accord with the laws, those confessions were challenged in court. It was not unusual for confessions to be rejected by trial judges. The revision of pertinent laws was completed and the compilation of the revised laws was now awaiting publication.

He said that prison overcrowding remained an ongoing problem at the Georgetown prison. A series of interventions had been made, the outcome of which had not been fully appreciated. Prisoners had been sent to peripheral facilities after an adequate selection process. Those facilities lacked the security features for certain categories of prisoners. Therefore, only those who fulfilled the criteria for lesser security protection were sent to such facilities. The Government had also sought to address the issue of trial delays so that remanded prisoners would not accumulate while the delay of their cases continued. Appointing more magistrates and paying more vigorous attention to judicial performances would also contribute to addressing the issue of overcrowding.

Recently, he went on, legislation had been enacted to limit custodial sentences on those convicted under the Narcotic and Psychotropic Act, a frequent cause of imprisonment in Guyana, which also contributed to the overcrowding problem. The intention to renovate prison facilities had always been there in the prison directorate and at the level of central government. Recently, that commitment was strengthened and improved security at facilities had been addressed. Also, facilities for sanitation and the provision of potable water had been improved and the provision of additional financing to address the issue of diet had also been addressed. The issue of overcrowding and the physical and mental health of prisoners continued to be an important issue dealt with by the Department of Home Affairs.

The independence of the judiciary was established in the Constitution and needed to be analysed in the context of the constitutional reform process, he said. The 1980 Constitution had allowed judges to be appointed by the President on the advice of the Judicial Commission. That article had been retained. Currently, the terms of office were also being subjected to review under the constitutional reform process.

Concerning freedom of expression and the remedies available to journalists or others subjected to intimidation or violence, he said that specific remedies for journalists did not exist. In the context of common law, the remedies available to anyone subjected to intimidation or violence with regard to exercise of any right were also available to journalists. Those were the sole legal recourses. Journalist organizations and media houses, for which they worked, often reacted to intimidation, harassment and violence. A more complicated matter was that those journalists were themselves considered to have abused the rights protected by article 19 of the Covenant. The administration was considering enacting broadcast legislation and introducing measures to address the safety of journalists, as well as the abuse of those rights by the journalists themselves.

The delegation, he said, had submitted to the Committee a document prepared by the Ministry of Health and Social Services dealing with the issue of street children. The document had identified the socio-economic causes of that phenomenon. The inavailability of counseling services for families, abandonment of the formal education process and the attractions of street life were among the contributing factors. Essentially, it was the multiple and interconnected threats to family life that had contributed to the emergence of street children. The administration had attempted to identify, in the major urban areas, the specific children that would fall under the category of street children. Since the process of categorization was not precise, so far the central agencies had only been able to identify less than 200 children in a population of over 200,000 in Georgetown.

On measures to protect children from abuse, he said that the Convention on the Rights of the Child had been in existence in Guyana for a long time and contributed to creating an administrative environment in which many Convention provisions were implemented and protected. The rights of the child were enshrined in Guyana’s laws. The legislative measures were in place and, in the administrative sphere, significant recruitment was taking place in the ranks of social workers, counselors and probation officers to address the problem in a timely and appropriate manner.

Responding to a question raised about children born out of wedlock, he said there was a 1993 act which provided for such children to enjoy the same benefits as those born in wedlock. As the report said, there were implementation problems and amendments were being proposed.

Providing information on the application of article 25, on the election of members of Parliament and the effects of the proposed new constitution in that regard, he said that under the existing 1980 Constitution, a Member of Parliament must be on a list that is presented to the electorate at national elections. That list was compiled in alphabetical order and did not reflect a priority. The appointment of successful Members of Parliament was based on seats won and was at the discretion of the Representative of the List. The current system had generated considerable debate during the current constitutional reform process. Two issues had emerged: the desire of people to have greater geographic and gender representation in Parliament.

He said the question of geographic representation was now at the level of the constitutional draftspersons. Regarding gender representation, discussions were being held at the level of the parliamentary political parties. It was expected that geographic and gender representation would be features of the new Constitution which would hopefully be promulgated this year.

Questions and Comments by Experts

An expert said that in many cases the responses given by Guyana’s delegation to issues raised by the Committee were not what had been expected. He hoped the delegation would provide the appropriate responses on Monday. The information given today was vague. The second report itself was not extensive in its answers to the Committee’s questionnaire and very often there were gaps and a lot of theoretical statements related to the Constitution.

The same expert said there was need for more specific detail on the reform of the Constitution. On the issue of violence against women, he said the Committee had not been given the statistical information requested. On the issue of children born out of wedlock, the Committee had been told of an Act and problems in its full implementation. What were those problems, he asked? Also the report spoke of the disparity for women in public life. What were those disparities, why did they exist and what measures were envisaged to correct them?

He expressed dissatisfaction with the information provided on prohibition of torture, liberty and security of person, the treatment of prisoners and the right to a fair trial. He also expressed concern at how pre-trial detention could be extended from several months to several years. More information on habeus corpus was needed. For example, he asked, how did it work?

The expert stressed that torture was a generalized practice in Guyana. There were many cases to testify to that. He cited the case of Mark Brown, who was taken to a private room by police and abused. Another person was pistol whipped –- witnesses affirmed that he was killed by police. He requested more specific information on incidents such as those and the measures that were being taken to address them.

An expert admitted that he was confused with many of the dates mentioned in the presentation. As Guyana’s report had been due in 1987, he wondered whether the information provided today was updated. Which points in the report were current and which were not? Also, why should there be any extra-judicial killings and what were the current statistics with regard to that? While he was told that television in Guyana was independent, was that also the case with radio? Were the rights of aliens, apart from expulsion, fully protected as required by the Covenant? He wanted a clear indication of how much of the report was applicable today.

Another expert agreed that a significant period of time had passed since the second periodic report, which covered only the period from 1982 to 1987, which was almost 13 years ago. Most of the replies today were general in nature and many unanswered issues remained. The Committee had sent the list of issues some time ago and he wondered why it had to wait until Monday to receive the replies to those questions. He hoped to get more recent and more solid information on Monday and requested clarification on the changes that had occurred between 1987 and 1999. What had been the status of the Covenant in domestic law when the report was written and had that changed?

On the right to life, he noted a number of undocumented cases of police shootings. Why were they not documented? Had that situation changed? Also, as of 13 years ago, corporal punishment was still practised in schools. Was that situation different now and what were the delegation’s views on the compatibility of that practice with Covenant provisions?

He also noted that during the period under review, civil servants had been requested to work on a coconut plantation and had felt that their jobs would be jeopardized if they refused. Such a situation could be a case of forced labour, and he sought clarification on that. In addition, ruling parties were using arbitrary arrests against opposition leaders. Was that still the case today?

The report was out of date and brief in certain aspects to the point of being uninformative, stated one expert. For example, it contained only 10 lines on equality under the law and the rights of minorities, which was not satisfactory for the Committee. While he noted that there was an Anti-Discriminatory Act (1997) and various agencies designed to protect women, there was no sign of an overall monitoring body to ensure that the Act was properly carried out and that complaints were effectively dealt with.

Also, he requested more information on the independence of the Police Complaints Authority. He was not in a position to make a proper evaluation of the independence of the oversight bodies. The problem of prison overcrowding had also not been addressed in the kind of detail that it should have been. The Georgetown Prison housed almost three times its nominal capacity, which was a very serious situation. He wanted to know what was being done in that regard, as well as what was being done about the situation of the housing of juveniles with adults.

An expert welcomed the delegation’s assurance that in the future death sentences would not be carried out prior to the consideration by the Committee of a communication alleging violation of the Covenant. He hoped that the new mechanisms would successfully prevent such occurrences. He was glad to hear that deliberations had not already concluded on the possible withdrawal of Guyana’s reservation to the Optional Protocol.

Regarding police brutality, he said that there must be a sense of carelessness about citizen’s rights on the part of police officers. To a certain degree, that was also the fault of the Government. It must be possible to change the minds of the police officers and to let them know that it was not justifiable to perform such acts. He urged the Government to do more to educate all those in law enforcement.

He had been informed that there was no legal representation at pre-trial hearings, even in death penalty cases, and that legal representation was only possible when the trial started. Was that correct? If it was, he doubted that it was in conformity with the Covenant.

Another expert noted that the Committee did not have, as yet, the information needed to make a proper assessment of the human rights situation in Guyana. On the situation of women, she wanted to know whether there had been any applications and decisions under existing laws that helped to advance women’s status. Was there a law outlawing sexual harassment in the workplace? How did the equality of women fare with the potential for discrimination in personal and family law? She also asked whether any action had been taken to sensitize police and other law enforcement officials in the area of domestic violence.

Turning to prisons, she said specific information was needed about the number of prisoners for which the prisons were designed and how many they currently held. While others had already mentioned the non-segregation of adults and juveniles, she wanted to know why it was appropriate to hold children as young as eight and nine in lock-up for months at a time.

One expert said he found it difficult to consider Guyana’s report in the same way as other reports. He did not understand how or why the report was submitted so late and what the reasons were for presenting it after more than a decade. What was the real attitude of Guyana vis-à-vis the Covenant? What was the attitude of the judiciary and lawyers towards the Covenant? Generally, what was the attitude of civil society towards the obligations freely undertaken by the Government vis-à- vis the Covenant? Were there any non-governmental organizations that dealt with human rights and made their voices heard? Had the last elections not been as transparent as they could have been?

In the past, he said, many arrests had been politically motivated. Surely some kind of monitoring by the courts could have brought a measure of control over such violations. Some type of limit could be prescribed in the laws governing criminal procedure, which would indicate to the police that they had to bring people to the courts by a certain time. Otherwise, if left up to the police, there would be differences in the amount of time considered reasonable and practical.

He also requested the delegation to provide statistics on the number of death penalty cases from 1981 to 1986. The right to life was one of the most sacred rights of the Covenant. What was the position with regard to the right to life in Guyana? He wanted to know how many persons had had their sentences commuted and how many were actually executed. It was very important that a State party came before the Committee and prepared reports regularly, as that would make the Committee’s work and the benefits derived by the State party all the more real.

Reply by Government

Mr. LUNCHEON acknowledged how valuable the contributions of the Committee members had been so far. He explained, however, that the arrival of the 1982-1987 report some 13 years after its due date had placed both the Committee and his administration in an invidious position, in the sense that the political environment in the country had undergone considerable changes since 1987. Had he the authority, he would want to move towards disregarding many of the submissions in the report for the purpose of the present discussion and “confine ourselves” to the current requests for clarification asked for in oral presentations of the Committee members. That approach would better address the Committee’s concerns about the present situation.

He said full explanations of the present situation were more relevant than the issues in the 1982-1987 report. Should his proposal be accepted, it would facilitate a better understanding of the way the people, the society, the legislature and the

judiciary saw the Covenant in its entirety. There had also been a lot of misunderstandings voiced today that required clarification.

Responding to a question on legislation prohibiting discrimination, he said the interest was not only in the promulgation of laws, but also in their promotion. Based on the legislation that currently existed, the intention of the constitutional reform process to address the issue of discrimination in its broadest sense was an important intervention at this point in time. While special remedies and solutions were being discussed, it would be important to benefit from some contribution from the Committee in his country’s efforts to address discrimination in legislation. That intervention could help guide the State in finding the appropriate ways to move from legislation to what the Committee was really interested in knowing.

He said addressing the steps being taken to overcome racism between various ethnic groups, particularly between Indo- and Afro-Guyanese, would demand an answer that would occupy a considerable amount of the Committee’s time. He wanted to extend the scope of anti-discrimination to include other ethnic communities in Guyana who had also been agitating against discrimination. He suspected the constitutional reform process was not well known by the Committee members and hoped that time would be provided for such information to be made available to them.

He said the constitutional reform process was fast approaching its conclusion. The principle articles needed to be brought before the Human Rights Committee. The Ethnic Relations Committee was just one example of ways in which the intended constitution was being drafted so as to address specific concerns that the people of Guyana had deemed worthy of further consideration, even outside the realm the Covenant.

* *** *