The Scramble for Guyana on the Catwalk
THE scramble for Guyana, a daily show, now parades on the catwalk, comprising contestants who ‘live off politics’ and those who ‘live for politics’; and in betwixt are those who clearly are square pegs in round holes. Oops, the coalitions in vitro are here, too.

And the ruling party, the PPP/C, in the context of an election season, must engage the populace with this question: should we not continue this government’s progress and prosperity for the future?  President Clinton asked a similar question toward the end of his second term when he advocated for a return of the Democratic Party to government.

President Bharrat Jagde,  at the endpoint of his second term, continues to make repeated calls for the reelection of the PPP/C to office. Jagdeo’s populist attraction inclusive of his Cabinet outreaches and his visits to certain communities dwarfs the capacity and imagery of his political opponents.

QUOTE: President Bharrat Jagde,  at the endpoint of his second term, continues to make repeated calls for the reelection of the PPP/C to office. Jagdeo’s populist attraction inclusive of his Cabinet outreaches and his visits to certain communities dwarfs the capacity and imagery of his political opponents.
The political dwarfism his opponents experience emits this response where they think that Jagdeo must be pondering over a third term; and, indeed, the thought of a Jagdeo third term sends shivers in the spines of the coalition in vitro, as they seek out a political design for elections 2011. Perhaps, elections could be sooner than later. Perchance, the coalitions could still be in vitro on elections day.


The political dwarfism his opponents experience emits this response where they think that Jagdeo must be pondering over a third term; and, indeed, the thought of a Jagdeo third term sends shivers in the spines of the coalition in vitro, as they seek out a political design for elections 2011. Perhaps, elections could be sooner than later. Perchance, the coalitions could still be in vitro on elections day.

And what is the damn fuss about the third term anyway? There is a constitutional mechanism in place to make this happen: securing two-thirds of the vote in Parliament can effect an amendment to the Constitution to make the third term a reality; it is all legal. Nevertheless, the political contenders’ bravura obsession with the third-term phenomenon remains a spectacle to all Guyanese.

Let me return to the ‘election season’ question of continuing with the ruling PPP/C’s progress and prosperity. Or Guyanese could use President Reagan’s 1980 standard: “Are we better off today than we are eight years ago?” Or perhaps, Guyanese could adopt President Harry Truman’s saying: “If you want to live like a Republican, you better vote for the Democrats.” If you want to live the good life, vote for the PPP/C.

It is quite appropriate to present these questions to the Guyanese people. And it is the nature of these questions that forms the basis of today’s Perspective, where I interpret Nelson Kasfir’s work in the Third World Quarterly. At this time, I do not want to present you with a trail of statistics. Perhaps, readers may want to review the Bank of Guyana half-yearly report 2010 for some understanding of Guyana’s real and nominal economic development.

Here, I would want to mention some security issues affecting freedom and democracy prior to the PPP/C’s election to office in 1992. Nevertheless, any explanation on freedom and democracy requires understanding the PNC’s legacy of repression.

The changeover to democracy came in 1992 after 24 years of authoritarianism; at that time, no institution made the PNC regime accountable to the masses; it was an age of coercion where PNC rulers exercised infinite authority and controlled the fabric of social life.

In the PNC’s ruling 24 years, the National Security Act suspended the right to Habeas Corpus, allowing the PNC regime to restrict and detain Guyanese without trial for an indefinite period. In 1977,  reenactment of Part II of the National Security Act permitted security forces to detain indefinitely Guyanese without bail and trial. Young people would need to get a grip on this kind of repression. I do not believe Guyanese want to return to some of the darkest days of this country’s history.

Today, Guyana can boast of being a multiparty representative democracy, a populist democracy, and a Madisonian democracy. Locke offered a philosophical structure for a commonwealth where people give assent to being governed by elected representatives.

I suspect that elected representatives vis-a-vis government and parliament perform the governance functions. And the political parties really are the mechanisms to help people work out their preferences, to mobilize, and to make their preferences matter in government’s decisions. These parties marshal resources for participating in elections, and to make the government accountable to the people

Nonetheless, because the elected representatives represent the citizens, their ‘representative’ functions by definition, remove the ordinary citizens from being physically in the decision-making loop in government.

To correct this situation, the Guyana Government is bringing the citizens closer to governmental decision making through local government decentralization. Here is one example; Article 78B was inserted in the Constitution; this article enables the electoral system below the Regional Democratic Councils to provide for the participation, representation, and accountability of individuals and voluntary groups to the voters.

Guyana has a multiple political party system; where political parties are an important mechanism for democracy, since multiparty representation relies heavily on electoral competition of the parties to present their platforms and to identify citizens’ concerns.

Nevertheless, having only a multiparty representative democracy combined with a populist democracy is necessary but not sufficient. It is not enough to have only representative parties and impartial electoral rules. We also need aspects of Madisonian democracy, as Kasfir puts it. This means that individual freedoms within a multi-representative democracy require protection through the constitution; where there are checks and balances through the doctrine of the separation of powers – executive, legislature, and judiciary.

The essence of the argument is that we need what Kasfir calls ‘a mixed constitutional democracy’ – elements of a populist democracy, multiparty representative democracy, and a Madisonian democracy. Guyana has these elements of a mixed constitutional democracy; nevertheless, it is a work in progress.

For these reasons, President Jagdeo and the ruling PPP/C are quite in order to ask the people whether they want progress, prosperity, and the consolidation of democracy to continue; I am sure the Guyanese people will give a resounding ‘yes’; and the President and his Cabinet should go to all villages, sugar estates, and towns in this country to spread the word of democracy; and they should spare no village.

(Feedback: pmperspectives@aol.com or  themisirpost.wordpress.com)