![]()
11 years of challenges:
POLITICAL SITUATION
October 5, 2003 marks the
beginning of the 11th year of the PPP/Civic alliance in office. October 5 from
1992 represents the triumph of democracy over dictatorship. It was appropriately
termed – the dawn of a new era. Achievements scored in nearly every sector
have been phenomenal. The balance between human development and economic growth
has received plaudits from national and international agencies. Much will be
said and written about the enormous all-round progress in Guyana during those
eleven years. But for there to be a full appreciation of the significant advancements,
a review of the challenges, some very daunting, and the obstacles placed in
the path of development is necessary.
The question in many persons’ minds at 1992 was: Is the PNC going to allow
the PPP/C to govern the country free from political instability? Having demitted
office, after fraudulently staying in power through internationally confirmed
rigged elections, was the PNCR going to play the role of a vigilant, yet responsible
Opposition? Unfortunately, the answers to those questions were in the negative,
judging by the PNCR statements, actions and positions in the years ahead.
Within three months of the election of the PPP/Civic, the late Leader of the
PNC Desmond Hoyte vowed at a public meeting at the Square of the Revolution
that the government “would not last for six months.” This he later
revised to two years. But these statements were clear signals that the PNC would
not allow the Government to do its job and portended the interruptions and even
destructions of opposition confrontational politics of the coming years.
FALSE CHARGES
Shortly, thereafter a pernicious propaganda campaign to create ethnic tensions
and fears commenced. The new-found freedom which the PPP/C had restored was
employed in various ways by the PNC to undermine the State and to retard overall
social and economic progress.
The first cry was “ethnic cleansing” and later “discrimination/marginalisation.”
Whenever the Government moved to repair the corrupt and inefficient governmental
systems, the PNC was swift to cry “ethnic cleansing.” These charges
were without any factual basis and could never have been proven. The late President
Cheddi Jagan went even further to enhance freedom. He signed up the United Nations
Optional Protocol on Political and Civil Rights to allow Guyanese to present
charges of ethnic cleansing and discrimination for investigation. No one, not
even the PNCR ever used this mechanism. But the wild charges of discrimination
continue until today.
The PNC claims to be concerned about the rights of Guyanese of African descent.
However, it refused to participate in the 1993/1994 Race Relations Task Force
and rejected Anglican Bishop Randolph George (an Afro-Guyanese) as the proposed
Chairperson of a suggested Race Relations Committee. The PNC did not want any
mechanism in place to expose its baseless claims in its bid to create political
instability. In fact, Congress Place sought to keep itself relevant to the Afro-Guyanese
population by its naked appeal to racism and perpetuation of the myth of Africans
being discriminated and marginalized by the PPP/C government.
The PNC until today continues to play the race card. It fabricates and even
fuel tensions in various communities. Statements by former and current leaders
in the PNC confirm this dangerous position. Even the involvement of the PNC
and other extremist elements in making Buxton a safe-haven for criminals in
the height of the crime spree are recent examples of this explosive mixture
of race and violence, and more recently crime.
DEMONISING THE POLICE
Following its defeat at the 1997 elections, the PNC intensified its campaign
of political instability. Again, this was articulated by Hoyte who declared
that his party will make “Guyana ungovernable.” Later he referred
to members of the security forces as his party’s “kith and kin”
as they were mainly Afro-Guyanese and should not carry out their constitutional
duties of maintaining law and order. He wanted the security forces to allow
the PNC campaign of violence and political sabotage to go unchecked.
Recognising that the electorate had enough of its 28 years of misrule and oppression,
the PNC seemed ready to force itself back into power at any cost, even at the
cost of Guyana’s social and economic progress. The PNC organised 1997-2001
post-elections violence, showed how far that party was ready to go to create
political havoc and undermine stability in the country with the aim of weakening
the government and hoping for its eventual collapse.
The security forces conducting themselves in a professional manner made the
PNC turn its political guns on them. A vicious campaign in the media (primarily
the opposition talk show hosts and commentators on Channels 6, 9 and 28) and
on the streets intensified to discredit and undermine public confidence in the
Guyana Police Force. The PNC sought to make out the police as public enemy number
one and singled out particular officers as objects of its demonisation campaign.
The attacks on the police, street marches, politically-inspired violence and
political stalemate as a result of boycotting Parliament and aborting dialogue
processes with the government, created a fertile environment for criminals of
all shades. The crime wave that followed the February 23 2002 jail break was
no coincidence and was not without political linkages. The PNC for months was
ambivalent on the crime situation and was reluctant to support the law enforcement
agencies in combating crime. Several political figures were known to be in contact
with the criminal network. These episodes exposed the Opposition’s scheme:
political and social instability will be encouraged even if it means cavorting
with the criminals.
BAD FAITH
Another strain of the opposition’s non-cooperation stand and pressure
on the political environment has been its consistent acts of bad faith. This
type of behaviour poses severe challenges for any democracy and more so in Guyana’s
case with advanced constitutional provisions for inclusion and participation.
Dating back to the 1997 elections, many aspects of the agreements brokered by
CARICOM to resolve the political impasse were ignored or simply violated by
the PNCR. Understandings reached at inter-party discussions and at the Parliamentary
level were reneged on, frequently. The most celebrated case has been the use
of voters’ identification card for the 1997 elections. The PNC agreed
with other parties at the Inter-Party Committee for Electoral Reform that voters’
identification cards would be used for the 1997 elections. They even actively
supported the various programmes by the Guyana Elections Commission and the
donor community to support its implementation and usage by voters. Then following
the elections and in response to its electoral defeat, the PNC challenged the
outcome of the elections in Court on the basis that the usage of voters’
identification card was unconstitutional.
The PNC track record in holding its end of agreements and understandings has
been disappointing. The hope is that there will now be some redemption giving
the current constructive engagement process between the President and the Leader
of the Opposition. The question many are asking: Is the PNCR like a leopard
which cannot change its spots? Only the period ahead will tell.
The political challenges for the PPP/C are far from over. There is now teaming
up by the fringe political groups - GAP-WPA and ROAR and extremists elements
- to contribute to toughening the political environment in their quest to undermine
the Government. Judging from how it has successfully overcome the challenges
so far, especially during the past four years, those current and in the future
would no doubt be addressed with much confidence and a sense of commitment to
Guyana.
(The author is the
Information Liaison the President and a leader of the PPP)