IT’S now more than six weeks since the APNU+AFC Government assumed office – the second change of Government in almost 51 years. That has to be a record for multi-party democracies. In the final analysis, it raises questions about the quality of our democracy and/or the applicability of the winner-take-all system to our ethno-political circumstances.
Much has been said and written about this since 1961 without any real commitment on the part of successive political elites to do anything about it. The new Government said on the campaign trail that it is committed to reforming the constitution to put in place a more democratic system.
But even if the Coalition is serious about Constitutional Reform, such action would require the cooperation of the PPP, which seems to be in no mood at the moment to cooperate with the Government on anything.
This brings me to the heart of today’s column – the political reality in a situation where there is change of a longstanding Government in an environment of political hostility.
Our own political history in Guyana tells us that the immediate period after a change of Government is often characterised by political stridency by the political parties and by pressures from their supporters to be tough. In the end, there tends to be a period of political suspicion, sabotage, revenge and general instability.
When the PNC-UF coalition came to power in 1964 in the wake of the ethnic disturbances of the previous four years, it interpreted its mandate to restore order to the country, restore ethnic balance and take the economy in a direction away from the dogmatic communism of the previous Government. The PPP, for its part, felt “cheated, not defeated” and embarked on an aggressive campaign of non-cooperation, political and economic sabotage to which the new Government responded “condignly.” By 1974, the country was on its way down the authoritarian road.
When the PPP returned to power in 1992 after 28 years of PNC governance, the new Government lost no time in moving to cleanse the Government of what it saw as the sinners of the last three decades and remake the state in its own image.
Public servants, most of whom were African Guyanese, were summarily rooted out without regard to their competence. The PNC responded aggressively, culminating in 1997 with the mantra of “slow fire, more fire.” The Herdmonston Accord cooled things for a moment, but by 2001 the country was galloping down the road to a form of dictatorship that surpassed anything in the past.
So here we are in 2015. If the mistakes of the past are to be avoided, both the Government and the Opposition would have to show a lot of political maturity. The new Government has the task of balancing restoration of the dignity of Government on the one hand with respecting the democratic principles of fairness and inclusion on the other hand. The 1964 PNC-UF and the 1992 PPP Governments failed miserably in this regard.
The now Opposition PPP has made it clear that its attitude towards the Government would be one of non-cooperation and confrontation. That is a legitimate course of action that is not new to the PPP’s political practice. But the PPP in the coming months has to draw the line between non-cooperation and civil disobedience on the one hand and open economic and political sabotage on the other hand.
Dr. David Hinds, a political activist and commentator, is an Associate Professor of Political Science and Caribbean and African Diaspora Studies at Arizona State University. More of his writings and commentaries can be found on his YouTube Channel Hinds’Sight: Dr. David Hinds’ Guyana-Caribbean Politics and on his website www.guyanacaribbeanpolitics.com
By Dr. David Hinds
