Evil forces have been hard at work from this Government’s initiation in1992. Can these evil forces backslide Guyana’s democracy?

Democracy is more than casting ballots at election times. Karl (1990) refers to this as a ‘fallacy of electoralism’. Goldstone et al (2005) in their study of transitions to and from democracy analyzed about 1,300 political, demographic, economic, social, and environmental variables for all countries globally with populations greater than 500,000 through 1955-2003.

They concluded that democracy has to do with ‘election competitiveness’ and ‘inclusiveness’; and we can measure democracy through (1) and (2): (1) executive recruitment – the ‘how’ of the President’s appointment and the frequency and competitiveness of elections. Note the limits on the President through Articles 90, 180, and 182 of the Guyana Constitution. The issue here is whether elections are free and have at least two parties contesting elections.

Note that the 1992, 1997, and 2001 elections were free, fair, and transparent, and which international observers endorsed; note, too, the independent Guyana Elections Commission. (2) Competitiveness of political participation – the issue here is whether this Government limits political participation.

More countries today are less of a democracy not because of the quality of their elections, but more because of the quality of their political participation. Among other factors, absence of a Party from Parliament reduces quality participation.

Through 2001-2006, the PNC withdrew from Parliament as follows: March 25 – December 5, 2002; March 28, 2003 – April 14, 2003; March 19, 2004 – August 5, 2004; and November 22 – November 29, 2004. Almost two years of withdrawal delayed the processing and establishment of constitutional commissions and committee work in Parliament, negatively affecting the quality of PNC’s political participation.

We can discern sme embryonic political inclusiveness through the following, among others: (1) Jagdeo-Hoyte Joint Committees; (2) Constitutional Amendments creating: the Commissions;  Parliamentary Standing Committee for constitutional reform; Parliamentary Sectoral Committees, (3) responsible opposition; and (Public Accounts Committee; (5) membership on oversight committees, and state boards.

Now what is the risk of Guyana’s democracy backsliding to autocracy? Goldstone and others found that the risk is greater after 2 years, remaining until a democracy reaches age 15; though hardly backsliding after age 15. Only seven backslides in democracies aged over 15 occurred through 1955-2003: Brazil in 1964, Peru 1968, Philippines 1972, Chile 1973, Uruguay 1973, Fiji 1987, and Gambia 1994.

Goldstone and others argued that elections in young democracies are vulnerable to backsliding, especially to the second election; and that democracies in transition frequently have oppositions tottered by inadequate financing and mobilizational capacity.

They explained that elections force players to show whether they are willing to play with the new democratic rules. Democratic norms and practices are so strong today in Guyana that we are on the threshold of consolidation.

But weak opposition elements, grounded in an undemocratic culture, may fear the new dispensation would disadvantage them in an electoral contest. Such opposition forces thrive under conditions of instability; and, therefore, a weakened democracy would present them with political opportunities; thus, some elements’ acrimonious and threatening response to the new democratic culture; not surprising, as an electoral contest is at hand.