Dear Editor,
The two successful protest marches, organised by the main opposition party the PNCR, under the banner “Freedom March against dictatorship” in solidarity with Mr C N Shama and his workers(over the government closure of Ch 6 for 4 months), the rising cost of living, the crime crisis and the bogus charges against Mr Oliver Hinckson – should put to rest any question about Mr Corbin and his party’s capacity to get their supporters back to street marches after a protracted withdrawal from that form of protest. Many, supporters and detractors, had questioned the leadership of Mr Corbin. Some claimed that he had destroyed the party’s support base by his apparent lack of militant leadership. The situation had gotten so bad that at times, even senior activists and party leaders were in doubt about the party’s ability to resume street protests as an integral part of its political activism. These apprehensions have now been laid to rest.
The response by citizens to the PNCR’s call to return to the streets has signalled that they are ready and willing to struggle. Now that Mr Corbin and his party have committed themselves to struggle to achieve the demands of the “Freedom Marches” all forces that were critical of the PNCR for not taking to the streets to stop the excess of the regime must now rally around the Freedom Marches to convert them into a more effective demonstration of national rejection of President Jagdeo’s oppressive regime and its repressive actions. This is not the time for making excuses and for standing on the side lines. All Guyanese who claim to love freedom must now stand up and be counted. The struggle is on – let us stop the talk and do the marching.
The die has been cast. The regime has upped the ante and the main opposition party and its supporters have responded. The challenge facing the nation is to rise to the occasion and not squander this political moment. Other opposition forces and civil society organisations and individuals, which on the one hand have constantly claimed to be concerned about Guyana’s slide down the slippery slope to anarchy while at the same time are seemingly more disposed to appease the regime rather than stand up against its excesses, must now join the struggle or risk being condemned for letting the regime off the hook. The development of the struggle from here on depends on the collective will of these forces to fight the regime. If they fail to do so, they have to take the blame. It is fair to say that there has been broad consensus that Guyana needed militant opposition actions to counter the government’s disrespect for the Constitution and the rule of law, the trampling on people’s fundamental rights, and its insensitivity to the rising poverty of the masses. We have an opportunity to correct this weakness in the body politic of the nation. This is a national responsibility and not the sole responsibility of the PNCR.
There seem to be three negative trends of thought that have surfaced since the PNCR has returned to street protests. For the record, I am not attempting here to dignify the PPP/C’s propaganda conducted by their agents. What I am referring to here is the views of some persons who see themselves as part of the political opposition. I want to make it very clear that none of the following comments are from the “masses”.
It is being said that (1) Mr Corbin and his party are trying to take advantage of the actions by the government against Mr Sharma and the closure of his television station CNS CH 6 and the protest action in support of Sharma that was organised by the Guyana Press Association (GPA), and that both Sharma and the GPA have to be careful of Mr Corbin’s intentions. It is a shame that at this critical juncture in this country’s life there are still persons in our present political situation who are still prepared to raise fears about the PNCR. The way to influence PNCR political behaviour is not to allow that party to have a monopoly on militancy in the country. These critics should either join the PNCR marches or organise marches of their own.
(2) That Corbin is not serious about street protest; he is just trying to neutralise criticism of his leadership coming from persons in Guyana and overseas. My advice to those who share this view is to make it difficult for the PNCR and its leader to retreat from the streets without winning major gains for the people. This can only be done by mobilising support for the marches – once thousands are in the streets it will be almost impossible for Corbin and his party to walk away from the struggle, because by doing so they will be driving nails in their coffins. Put another way they will be committing political suicide. (3) That the PNCR came to the streets in defence of Sharma and did not do so for Mr Oliver Hinckson. This is being bandied around when it is widely known that Corbin had made up his mind to organise a march to protest Hinckson’s incarceration and it was just a matter of timing.
As far as I am aware, the party and its supporters were being mobilised for this event prior to the suspension of Sharma’s licence. What President Jadgeo’s decision to revoke the licence of Channel 6 served to do was to push Mr Corbin and his party’s backs against the wall. It cannot be denied that Hinckson’s imprisonment had angered many citizens including PNCR members and supporters. Hinckson’s detention once again presented them with the spectre of Mark Benschop’s incarceration, which they believed was unjustified and unnecessarily prolonged. The closure of Channel 6 was also viewed with deep suspicion and anger. When set alongside the government’s year-long denial of advertisements to Stabroek News people saw the closure of Channel 6 as a threat to the existence of Channels 9 and 28. It was in this scenario that terrific pressure was put on Corbin to renew street activity as a means of blunting the PPP/C government’s vicious assaults on fundamental rights in Guyana. In political terms, Sharma’s suspension was the straw that broke the camel’s back. It was therefore Jagdeo’s reckless abuse of power which forced Corbin to the realisation that he could no longer ignore the grumblings of his constituents and propelled his decision to return to the streets. What is important in relation to the criticism of Corbin is that he incorporated Hinckson’s matter as one of the many reasons for the present protest actions.
Robert Corbin and the PNCR leadership can be proud of their achievement of getting their supporters back on the streets; it is an excellent start. The people have demonstrated their trust in the party leadership and this trust must not be squandered. The time for the politics of threats is over – the masses want positive results. While Mr Corbin and his executive can applaud themselves I would like to advise that they continue to work to develop a broad-based coalition to take the struggle forward.
Many months ago I had made an appeal for a public discussion of forms of struggle in our context that could lead to meaningful political change in Guyana. To date, no one has responded and we are now in a new phase of struggle without any consensus on this critical aspect of national politics. Guyanese have a strange political culture. We wait when the struggle is unfolding to be critical but when we have the opportunity to influence the struggle in a positive way we often choose not to do so. I have expressed the view in many letters that African Guyanese mass organisations have to do much more to organise African militancy against the government and not allow that responsibility to only be on the PNCR. This is important since without African militancy there will be no meaningful political change. Note my emphasis is on the need for African militancy. Indians and others will not move against the PPP/C in a decisive way if Africans are not fighting. They will interpret our lack of militancy as either acceptance of the regime or our lack of will to resist. Opportunistically, they feel justified in their lukewarm opposition to the regime in spite of their sufferings. The PNCR, ACDA and other African organisations must therefore put out a political declaration of intent giving all races in the country the assurance of our commitment to the principle of non-domination. This is necessary and can be an effective political move in the struggle for meaningful change.
Finally, now that protests have returned to the streets, it is time for all who are serious about political change in the country to stand up and be counted. You have to be either part of the solution or you are part of the problem. Those who have problems supporting a PNCR-led march should organise their own marches or stand condemned as hypocrites.
Yours faithfully,
Tacuma Ogunseye
