GUYANA’S political opposition is under immense scrutiny as the potential elevation of U.S- indicted Azruddin Mohamed raises serious concerns over reputational consequences for the country and threats to democratic institutions.
The Association for Democracy and Human Rights Guyana, in a statement, made it clear that the nation is on a verge of walking into a serious reputational crisis if Mohamed is selected as Leader of the Opposition (LOO).
While the process of selecting the LOO is one that is straight forward, the impending selection of Mohamed—who is facing multiple indictments by the U.S— is a test of judgment, integrity, and national responsibility.
The statement read: “Let it be absolutely clear: if the Opposition were to select any other parliamentarian at this time,
that would be their lawful choice and a normal exercise of democratic practice. But elevating a man who has been sanctioned and indicted by the United States on 11 charges, and who is now
regarded internationally as a fugitive offender, is not normal, but it is reckless, indefensible, and dangerous.”
The Opposition Members must understand the gravity of what they are about to do, the democracy group emphasised, noting that electing an Opposition Leader under such circumstances would not only “drag the credibility of the Opposition into the gutter but it would place Guyana’s reputation, Parliament’s honour, and our national standing at severe risk.”
The group further stated that it would also send a “poisonous” message to the country, especially to the youth, “that status can be used to shield wrongdoing, that power can be used to sanitise disgrace, and that the highest offices can be treated like trophies rather than responsibilities. That is not leadership. That is moral collapse.”
The statement went on to read: “Democracy is not merely about numbers and votes. Democracy must be anchored in moral fortitude, decency, honesty, and respect for institutions. Without those values, democracy becomes a hollow performance– loud, shameless, and destructive.
“It is therefore deeply troubling to watch political actors behave as though they are saving democracy,” when democracy was never in danger.
:Mohamed and his acolytes were never chasing principled leadership, they were spotlight-chasing while manufacturing outrage and engaging in the worst forms of political theatre. Guyanese are not fools. They can see the circus for what it is.”
The Association for Democracy and Human Rights Guyana further cautioned the 29 Opposition Members of Parliament, “do not create a burden for yourselves and a stain for this nation by making the wrong choice,” noting that history will not treat this as a harmless political manoeuvre but history will judge it harshly.
The consequences, the group pointed out, political, institutional, and reputational will be theirs to answer for.
“This is the moment to open your eyes, reject the spectacle, and do what is right.
Guyana deserves real representation and not reckless symbolism, not moral compromise, and not leadership that turns Parliament into an international embarrassment,” the statement read.
