Dear Editor,
Guyana’s leading political commentator and University of Guyana lecturer Mr Freddie Kissoon has consistently advanced the thesis of the emergence of the practice of elected dictatorship in Guyana. To make this argument in one of his columns, Mr Kissoon cited Fareed Zakaria’s article on the rise of illiberal democracy. This argument has been challenged by some pro government spokespeople albeit with less intellectual antithesis. Peeping Tom in a KN column captioned `Guyana has no elected dictatorship’, is one such challenge to Mr Kissoon’s argument. The column began by asserting that the phrase elected dictatorship is an oxymoron (this very assertion incapacitated Peeping Tom’s rebuttal). Nonethe-less the Peeping Tom column attempted to show Kissoon’s lack of understanding of Zakaria’s illiberal democracy by citing one aspect of Zakaria’s argument, that is, the lack of adequate legal constitutional framework of liberties to restrain the power of elected governments, thus making governance illiberal in some countries; and use this as the basis of his (assuming masculinity) antithesis that Guyana has no elected dictatorship. What caught my attention about the Peeping Tom column at the time was the lack of comprehension of the phrase elected dictatorship. Peeping Tom went on to argue that because the government of Guyana was elected in 1992 and subsequently thereafter in free and fair elections, it cannot be classified as an elected dictatorship. Emphazing Zakaria, though misleadingly, the article argued “the essence of democracy has to do with the right of people to elect a government of their choice.”
I intend to argue that there is a process of de-democratization and the rise of an elected dictatorship in Guyana. But before someone replies that elected dictatorship is an oxymoron let me say that elected dictatorship is a theory in political science sometimes also called executive dominance. The phase elected dictatorship was first used by Lord Chancellor of UK Quintin Hogg at a lecture at the BBC in 1976 to describe the UK West Minister political system. So the phase is not new to political science.
However, let me hasten to argue that free and fair elections are not the essence of democracy; in fact it is just the procedural stage in “electoral democracy” which is a thin conception of the political processes involved in democratization according to democratic watch agency, Freedom House, based in New York. Political theorist Robert Dahl stipulates five classical process-oriented criteria for democracy, that are, effective participation, voting equality, enlightened understanding, control of agenda and inclusion of adults. Yet this remains a minimum package of democracy. Other political theorists such as Charles Tilly in his book, Democracy, includes other criteria such as protection and mutually binding consultation. Space does not permit me to explain these criteria. It has to be understood that post modern societies have moved beyond the Greek period definition of democracy.
Fareed Zakaria in his book, `The future of Freedom: illiberal democracy at home and abroad’, argues that ruling parties or leaders in Russia, Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Middle East ,after winning multi-party elections that are mostly free and fair – behave in a rather authoritarian manner. This may occur in countries with liberal democratic constitutions that are simply ignored. Many political theorists have used the phrases elected dictatorship and illiberal democracy interchangeably. This means that though there are elections that may be free and fair, the behavior of governance is dictatorial.
In 1992, after a period of 28 years of struggle, Guyana emerged through the process of free and fair elections as an electoral democracy. It was promised and widely expected that with many reforms to have followed democracy would have been deepened. Since then what we have seen instead of democratization is the process of de-democratization. Charles Tilly defined De-Democratization as the net movement toward narrower, more unequal, less protected and less binding consultation. In a letter captioned “Dismayed that Parliament refused to discuss the Citizens Petition on the Forestry Bill” (07.11.16) long time activist and anti-dictatorship stalwart Fr Malcolm Rodrigues lamented the fact that the government majority in parliament refused to discuss a citizens’ petition on the forestry bill. This disregard for citizens’ voices is an increasing trend in the rise of an elected dictatorship in Guyana. It is indeed a tragedy for democracy when citizens cannot bring a petition to parliament and have it discussed.
The severely partisan political culture of attending to parliamentary affairs makes the opposition virtually impotent. Minority representation in parliament is often met with government hostility, especially when important questions are asked concerning governance of the people’s affairs. In addition, there is an intense secrecy in which transactions are conducted and as such parliamentary opposition is left without vital information to inform and enhance the representation of their constituency. De-Democratization in Guyana occurs when one considers that after 15 years of the PPP/C administration there is no freedom of information legislation. A stark example of the lack of transparency in governance is the President lending 168 million of taxpayers’ money to a private business man to build a hotel in a shroud of secrecy. Since this deal and despite many questions the president refuses to release the details of this transaction.
Another aspect of De-Democratization in Guyana is the chaotic state of the judiciary. The society depends on the independence of the judiciary for legal protection. As of now there are only two justices of appeal with the resignation of Claudette Singh. One wonders why the government has allowed this situation to develop. Article 128 of the Constitution gives the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) power to advise the President on appointments to the Court of Appeal, yet the executive branch has allowed this important body to lapse. A depleted judiciary benefits executive dominance since such depletion hampers independence and could severely delay potential constitutional challenges to the administration.
The Stabroek News ad issue is another example of the march towards elected dictatorship. Stabroek News has emerged as a critical voice demanding accountability and the furtherance of democratization, and as a result the government responded by withdrawing its advertisement from that newspaper. By all accounts this act in itself constitutes a breach of the right to free speech. Democracy observers have agreed that any act of economic coercion of the media by government is a violation of the spirit of democracy. Planned protest action by Stabroek News at the Finance Ministers’ conference was denied the right to hold placards, another denial of freedom of expression.
Moreover, the President continues to use executive dominance and a style of micro management to determine who gets what, when and how. This includes the Mayor and City Council of Georgetown whose operation is dependent on whether the President decides to bail it out. Since 1992 there have been no local government elections, an important function of deepening democracy. The State is plagued by corruption in government, a high crime rate and increasing police brutality. The University of Guyana has had consistently an unpopular Vice Chancellor imposed upon it by the President without the full participation of University Council. The Guyana Public Service Union once again has had a wage hike imposed upon it without the benefit of third party arbitration. The Government continues to act increasingly like an elected dictatorship
Guyanese must be concerned with this process of De-democratization and the rise of elected dictatorship.
Yours faithfully ,
Dennis Wiggins
