JUST before Caesar marched on Rome, ending the Republic and eventually leading to the long rule of Roman emperors, there was a famous meeting that almost saved Roman democracy. In it, Caesar’s representative and close friend, Mark Anthony, met with leading Senators Cicero, Pompei and Cato to discuss the terms of Caesar’s disarmament. Of course, these negotiations failed, but it is that failure I think that is really critical to understanding the true context behind the next election in Guyana.

No issue crystalises this context more than the upcoming commissions of inquiry into death squads and other forms of extra-judicial killings. Even further, I will argue that these types of commissions are actually good for the PPP/C and that if they lead to an electoral loss in 2020, this will be better still for the party’s long-term competitiveness.

Essentially, the fall of the republic comes down to the decisions of one man, and Caesar that is not. Rather, Cato, with his steadfast loyalty to the past, and an overwhelming refusal to compromise, have been cited by many as the true culprit. This 2020 we will one way or another learn whether the PPP/C’s former supporters have decided to stubbornly return to their ranks, in particular, due to racially motivated voting.

But this article is not to indict the PPP/C, because that party is only a gasp away from developing a truly fair governance approach. Rather, we must all confront the past in the form of the much-needed commissions of inquiry.

I don’t want to rehash the gory details of Guyana’s most notorious crime spree, which will be a focal point for the inquiry, but at least make the point that even if extra-judicial killings were not actively allowed, they were not effectively prevented. This led to a series of anarchic outcomes, highlighted perhaps most prominently by the shooting of political commentator Ronald Waddell.

That extra-judicial killings, especially those of political commentators, take place is a classic sign of democratic governance collapsing. Rather than the law, it becomes the directives of the most powerful in society that determine who lives and who dies. It is better to have almost any other form of government, than one in which citizens are not safe to express their opinions.

This core threat to democratic governance is exactly what the Roman negotiators faced, but only Cicero is said to have truly recognised. If Caesar refused to disarm his legions, fearing persecution, he could instead simply march on undefended Rome and seize power from the democratically elected Senate. While Cato pushed for Caesar’s prosecution, Cicero advocated for the type of compromise that would diffuse this crisis.

Like Cicero, we need to recognise how serious it is that this crime spree took place under the PPP/C, and that stamping it out far outweighs all other electoral issues. If we do not demonstrate to them that such an inability to control extra-judicial killings is a standard we can’t accept, it sets an extremely worrying precedent. Even further, if such a poor security environment returns, it would not be surprising to see violence against party supporters from every group escalate as a form of revenge. This would reduce the democratic process to a form of rival gang warfare and perpetual civil strife, in much the same way as Caesar’s famous Roman invasion.

Additionally, I believe the best thing that could happen to the PPP/C strategically is an electoral loss in 2020. Not only would this force the party to take its past errors seriously and reform, it would resolve the internal ideological struggle, which I think limits the party’s policy-making and electoral effectiveness.

Conflict between the party’s historic communist, labour-friendly roots and its modern, pro-business stance undermines the PPP/C’s ability to advocate for the types of reforms that would help Guyanese businesses excel. I can imagine that every time senior party members advocated for a tax cut to benefit local firms, they were confronted with the group’s historical reliance on sugar worker votes, and the expensive bailouts that come with that commitment.

The pro-business potential that occasionally shone through has thus been stifled by left-wing commitments like bailing out failing sugar estates. This will only continue if they are elected in 2020, as they have already committed to monthly payments to thousands of former sugar workers with no specific end in sight.

Even more important, however, allowing this pro-business stance to flourish will broaden the party’s appeal as this is an approach behind which swing voters can get. As a result, the PPP/C would come out of a loss in 2020 a more effective party, both electorally and in policy-making, to the benefit of all Guyanese.

The commissions of inquiry into extra-judicial killings come I think at an opportune time. Guyanese will have at least a year before the next election to come to terms with what really happened and digest the implications this has for any administration wielding at least 300 million U.S. dollars a year in oil revenue. I believe the PPP/C has a critical role to play in building national greatness, but also that these types of inquires will make it clear that the party needs more time to reflect and reform.