THE theme for International Women’s Day 2020 — “An Equal World is an Enabled World” — is eminently appropriate for the troubled and tense situation in which Guyana finds itself.  References to ‘equality’ in Guyana are instinctively assumed to refer to ethnicity, especially in the electoral context. However, the more pervasive and deeply embedded source of inequality remains gender-based.

In the year 2000 when the constitution reform process was passed through Parliament, both of the major parties rejected the proposed inclusion of parity of names on electoral lists between men and women. Parliament unanimously opted for one-third names rather than the 50% proposed by the electoral expert, Professor Reynolds of Notre Dame University, who was advising Parliament at the time on this process. Furthermore, no effort was made to legislate the spirit of what Prof. Reynolds intended, namely, that the 50% be converted from names on the list to seats in Parliament.

Notwithstanding what the law said, no party was prevented from voluntarily opting for 50% names of women on lists and seats. No party, however, has ever done so.
Violence is institutionalised in Guyana’s electoral structure by encouraging ethnic polarisation. Political violence like other forms of violence – verbal, physical, sexual or mental — generally affects women more profoundly than men. This is not to say that some females are not associated with violence, but they are not normally the instigators, leaders and major perpetrators — at least not in Guyana.

As a gesture towards reconciliation of the society over the deep ethnic divisions which have once again manifested themselves in the on-going electoral crisis,  the major political parliamentary formations should publicly commit to dividing the seats they win in the new Parliament equally between males and females.

Such a gesture will not only remove a historical insult to women, but would  represent a real commitment to laying the foundation for resolving the more vexed question of fundamental electoral reform, which has blighted this country for the past 50 years.  When migration is factored into the social, economic and demographic cost of polarised politics, our country has suffered immeasurably.

Elimination of the violence suffered by generations of women in Guyana — the most pervasive and pressing violation of women’s rights — currently rests with men. While not all or predominantly perpetrators, men in general are not disposed to clearly listen to or vigorously name, describe and define this violence which has reached epidemic proportions in the society.

Rectifying the gender imbalance in Parliament is not a panacea for removing all gender-related violations, it achieves several important milestones in that journey.  In the first place, it eliminates legal discrimination from electoral lists; it creates a Parliament better prepared to address other forms of bias in the society.  Finally, a gesture of this nature both sends an important message to civil society institutions, particularly the faith-based sector, that historical bias and discrimination must be brought to an end.
Executive Committee
Guyana Human Rights Association