FORTUNATELY for Guyana, the Stabroek News (SN) was gone when the Variety of Democracy Institute (V-Dem), a research body in a globally unknown university (in Sweden) published its global democracy report for 2026. Had the SN been around, the report would have made the front page as the lead story.
Now the Kaieteur News (KN) carried the report on page 12 of its March 19, 2020 edition with the sub-headline: “Guyana among “grey zone” states.”
Just pompously and arrogantly, this obscure group puts, Guyana, a hugely democratic country and one of the world’s most democratic countries in a grey zone.
There is no explanation why an enduring democracy like Guyana is number 46 under the category of “electoral democracy” and Israel is number four. Guyana is 42 spaces below a country that commits genocide, practices apartheid and has a government committed to invading and annexing their neighbours’ lands.
This is one of the ugliest and most vulgar forms of theoretical degeneracy that was widespread in the colonies during the reign of European empires. Sixty years after Independence, two Guyanese newspapers – Stabroek News and Kaieteur News – continued to give prominent space to this destructive Western narrative. Guyana at least has been spared the spread of this colonial rampage by the demise of the SN.
There are so many ironies about that KN news item. One is that one of the editors that approved of the publication of the item worked closely with President Granger who authored a booklet entitled, “Forbes Burnham and the Liberation of Southern Africa.”
Mr. Granger has four foundations in Burnham’s name at his former civilian home at D’urban Backland. Would Burnham agree that Guyanese must accept European descriptions of their sociology?
The second irony is the grey zone category. How ironic that a newspaper should publicise that Guyana is in a grey zone when it comes to democracy. The very private media in Guyana have been in a grey zone in relation to professional journalism since 2020.
V-Dem is on record as telling former UG Sociology professor, Tara Singh, that it cannot name the researchers from Guyana that provide it with information. That should automatically disqualify V-Dem as a research institute. Research must be based on transparency – who are the researchers, what are their fields of expertise, and the methodology and format used in the research.
V-Dem would not answer any of these questions yet there are media organisations in this country the past five years that gave prominent coverage to the kind of research mediocrity that V-Dem turns out and the Eurocentric bias is simply barefaced.
There are four categories of democratic functioning according to V-Dem – liberal democracy, electoral democracy, electoral autocracies and closed autocracies. V-Dem has classified the first category of liberal democracy as the highest form of governance in a country. Since its beginning in 2014, V-Dem has put the European countries as the most democratic region in the world.
A shambolic state like Italy is in the first category. In the UK where you are arrested and jailed for having an association with an organisation named Palestine Action is listed as liberal democracy. Germany, which Stabroek News columnist, Asma John, says picks people secretly in the wee hours of the morning and deport them is listed as a liberal democracy.
France where women can be arrested for wearing the burka is categorised as a liberal democracy. Now how a country prevents a woman from wearing her religious symbol and allows a man to kiss a man in public and that country is classified as a democratic state?
So, what essentially constitutes a liberal democracy (Europe) from an electoral democracy (Guyana)?
It is better not to distinguish between the two models but to examine the governance structure in liberal democracies and electoral democracy. What is it that European countries have that makes democracy higher than in Guyana?
A newspaper column does not have space to elaborate on this point. I would contend that the Republic of Guyana has enduring features of democracy that many “liberal democracies” do not have.
Let’s select one structural feature – the rule of law. I do not believe that there is a judicial body in any liberal democracy that has more professional integrity than a corresponding institution in Guyana.
Getting justice in any court in any Western liberal society is problematic once there is a Muslim/terrorist aspect to the charge. Secondly, getting justice is problematic once the aspect of the charge relates to state security.
Julian Assange’s prosecution in the UK was a farce. The prosecution of Meng Wanzhou, CEO of Huawei, in Canada was a farce. The CCJ, Guyana’s highest court is superior to any judicial body in any liberal democracy.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Guyana National Newspapers Limited.