…new USAID report urges leaders to embrace reforms

A NEW report on governance and human rights here said last year’s victory by the APNU+AFC coalition is an opportunity for this country to move forward toward a more responsive and accountable State. But it also warned that this elections outcome is far from certain, although predicting that the coalition will last until the next elections. The assessment, conducted by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and with the full knowledge of the government, examined political change and democratization in Guyana, analysed core democracy and governance issues, actors, and institutions in the country and developed strategic and programmatic recommendations to address the further development of democracy and governance.
USAID said during the conduct of the assessment, the team met with representatives within the three branches of government– the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. Interviews were also conducted with a broad array of Guyanese leaders and experts, sub-national and local-level representatives and members of civil society to gain their perspectives on democracy and governance in Guyana and devise concrete recommendations. Interviews were conducted in late 2015. Tetra Tech ARD, a consulting firm based in Burlington, Vermont, U.S.A., was contracted by USAID to complete this assessment.
DEEP-SEATED LEGACIES OF PPP RULE
In the executive summary of its assessment, the USAID said the coalition government faces deep-seated legacies of single-party domination; politically driven ethnic divisions; and a centralised patron-clientelist system with weak, unaccountable, and unresponsive government institutions.
It noted that changing this system will not be easy, especially for a tenuous political coalition, inexperienced in governing and confronted by an entrenched opposition and a frustrated population with unrealistically high expectations. “Guyana’s past demonstrates that these windows do not remain open for long as engrained practices take over and the government assumes the attributes of the past,” the report noted.
It said that political missions have moved swiftly to support the reform efforts diplomatically and through discrete mission funds and that the Democracy, Governance, and Human Rights (DRG) Assessment recommends that development agencies follow suit to take advantage of these opportunities quickly to deepen democratic development in Guyana.
In particular, the DRG assessment recommends that the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) provide immediate assistance to support the constitutional reform process, bring balance to Guyana’s governance, and strengthen local government and its first elected local governments in 23 years. This should be followed by a bilateral DRG programme for the medium to long-term that could help institutionalize the reforms and ensure their consolidation.
ONE-PARTY RULE
Meanwhile, the report noted that governance in Guyana has been characterised by long periods of one-party rule, ethnically divisive politics, inefficient government, and corruption. “Its oldest political party, the People’s Progressive Party (PPP), split before independence, creating the two main parties: the PPP and the People’s National Congress (PNC), which alternated power until 2015.
The PNC was in power from independence until 1992 through tight, centralized party control and rigged elections. In 1992, international mediation led to credible elections and a change in government to the PPP/Civic (PPP/C) party. The PNC did not accept those election results or the PPP/C’s next win in 1997 and violence erupted after both elections. The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) negotiated new elections in 2001 that were to be preceded by constitutional reforms. The PPP/C went on to win the elections in 2001, 2006, and 2011.”
The report cited that in 2011, the PPP/C failed to gain the majority votes in the National Assembly, resulting in a minority government for its president.
“This created a political stalemate that led to the president suspending the parliament after a threat of a no-confidence vote. Parliament was eventually dissolved and new elections held in May 2015. These elections were won by the PNC/Reform (PNC/R)-dominated A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) that formed a coalition with the moderate, multi-ethnic Alliance For Change (AFC). The APNU + AFC ran on a democratic reform agenda, promising constitutional reforms and the holding of long-delayed local elections. It won a one-seat majority in the Assembly and faces the PPP/C in opposition that has challenged the election results in court.”
The report also mentioned that Guyana’s political parties reflect their ethnic makeup, observing that the PPP courted the Indo-Guyanese, which made up more than 40 percent of the population, while the PNC courted the Afro-Guyanese who comprise about 30 percent of the population. The indigenous and mixed populations provide the swing votes.
Challenges
Additionally, the report identified what it described as key challenges to governance here, noting that the assessment found problems in all five elements of democracy: human rights, and governance. The most critical were in the areas of competition and political accountability and government responsiveness and effectiveness.
Noting that consensus has been difficult, the report said that Guyanese have a shared political culture and the belief that democracy is the only legitimate form of government, but long-standing acrimony between the PPP/C and PNC/R makes achieving consensus on policies, committee appointments, and constitutional reform priorities difficult at the national level.
However, social capital and the shared desire for change facilitate consensus building at the regional and local levels. It stated that no group is legally excluded or formally disenfranchised, but there is perceived and real ethnic exclusion from the political processes and social discrimination based on race, gender, socio-economics, and sexual orientation. “There is also de facto discrimination of indigenous people and those who live in the periphery in terms of access to social services and economic development,” the report noted.
According to the report, historically, political competition has been dominated by two main parties aligned largely along ethnic lines and it noted that elections incite and exacerbate ethnic tensions as the de facto winner-take-all system promotes one-party rule.
“Power is centralised in the executive and the formal checks-and-balance system is marginalised by ineffective/non-functioning institutions, patron-client relationships, and corruption. Success of the multi-party coalition in the 2015 elections may signal a shift toward more issue-based politics, but it faces stiff opposition from the losing party. The introduction of single-member seats in the March 2016 local elections offers an opportunity for change. Touching on the area of security, the report stated that there is significant need to reform the Guyana Police Force (GPF) and strengthen its investigations and prosecutions.”
It mentioned that an estimated 90 percent of prosecutions are unsuccessful and it is the least-trusted institution in the country. The Guyana Defence Force (GDF) is a trusted institution and is seen as above politics. It recently re-joined with the GPF to fight the upsurge in crime.