THE Government has recently, via public notice, announced its intent to re-establish the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC). This constitutional body, enshrined in Article 212 of the Guyana Constitution, truthfully should always be in operation. That its function was undermined, stymied, and politicised under the previous government which gave rise to concern about its usefulness, careful examination and appreciation of the services it is intended to provide make it a vital and necessary institution to society.

Ours is a society where tensions, accusations and counter-accusations towards and against individuals and groups are daily occurrences, though these are often publicly manifest in the forms of race, class, politics, governance, religion, and sexual orientation. The importance of ferreting out the credibility of any of these claims, and the extent to ensure that where a legitimate grouse or discrimination exists, how it could be resolved and re-occurrence minimised or eliminated, is tough work.

The work of the ERC does not require the faint of heart nor non-committed. It entails continual gathering of evidence, maintaining open minds and open-door policy, being au fait and keeping abreast with universal declarations, international conventions and charters, and local laws. To be effective, it has to not only function as a receiver and analyser of complaints, but as advocate to bring about positive changes to realise harmonious relations between and amongst the people.

It may very well find that one of its roles in promoting education and training programmes in pursuit of arriving at ethnic peace and harmony will met a society wedded to myths, which would require much undoing. One such is securing acceptance that diversity is strength, no one is superior to the other, and historical physical genetic appearances and religious beliefs are traits to be proud of not defiled, denied or ridiculed.

In our polarised society, treating each other with respect and dignity requires on-going conversations that allow for ventilation of perceptions, real or contrived, opportunities for recourse, and corrective actions taken where necessary.  Politicisation of such an institution, in our suspicious environment, is bound to see its credibility being brought into disrepute and it would help in the re-establishment if such is avoided at all costs.

Whoever is entrusted the responsibility to be a member of the commission ought to know that this is hard and diligent work that requires commitment to human decency, growth and development.  This is not a commission to be trifled with. Where no interest lies in working assiduously to improve ethnic relations as against ethnic dominance and marginalisation, and recognition that the welfare of one group is intertwined with the welfare of others, should respectfully not sit on this commission.

The performance of the ERC under the chairmanship of Bishop Juan Edghill, who subsequently served as a minister in the PPP/C government and is a serving Member of Parliament of the party, though the right to freedom of association must be respected, the fist under which he led that institution left little room as to what was his agenda and to whom he felt he was in service to.

It would not be an untruthful statement in saying that the commission had instances where its decisions and work were not driven by objectivity, but that of furthering an agenda that not only denied the fundamental rights and freedoms of others, but set out to promote what the body was established to correct. Some such instances were the suppression of academic freedom, attempts to marginalise voices in society, and absence of rigour and due diligence required of research in order to objectively pronounce.

Another hindrance to the last ERC’s effectiveness outside of limited administrative staffing and other resources, biased, politically driven agenda, was that of non-conformity with composition according to constitutional requirements. That commission operated without representatives from the Human Rights Commission, Indigenous People’s Commission, Women and Gender Equality Commission, and Commission for the Rights of the Child.  This means that the named sectoral interests were not articulated by those constitutionally required to so speak and represent them.

The function of the ERC includes providing equality of opportunity between persons of different ethnic groups and to promote harmony and good relations between and among groups. The institution also has the responsibility to encourage and create respect for religious, cultural and other forms of diversity in our plural society. This includes promoting and encouraging the acceptance and respect by all segments of the society of the social identity and cultural inheritance of all ethnic groups.

The goals of the ERC in this polarised society are noble, timely, and needed like yesterday. What is required now is the appointment of honourable men and women to serve, who will bring with them the commitment and determination in working to realise its stated goals.