Dear Editor,
I disagree with two sentiments: (i) a multiethnic party like the AFC will take Guyana to the promised land; and (ii) power sharing cannot work in Guyana.
Let me start with (ii) above. Power sharing is not possible under the 1980 Burnham constitution. We see President Jagdeo making full use of it today. Power sharing is only likely to succeed under a constitution that promotes cooperation. This winner-take-all constitution leads to zero sum outcomes. Change the constitution to a situation where the loser also gets a stake in government and you are likely to get cooperation. People are not mad. They are typically rational. The PNC behaves the way it does because it knows given the race based pattern it will be marginalized indefinitely.
That was also the primary reason driving Burnham and Hoyte to rig the elections, which perpetuated the marginalization of the Indian population.
With respect to (i) I prefer multi-ethnic government to the so-called multi-ethnic party (MP). The MP is ad hoc, and ultimately is at the whim of the chosen leader. Why should the PPP and PNC’s (and now the AFC’s) party constitution be more powerful in determining our national leaders rather than our constitution?
I don’t believe for one second that Mr Trotman and Mr Ramjattan will be benevolent leaders if given a shot under this constitution. However, they will become far better leaders if they are allowed to operate under a constitution that promotes cooperation along ethnic lines.
So please let us stop chasing the wrong goals. This constitution has to be ditched. There has to be cooperation at the governance level and not necessarily at the party level. Such cooperation can only occur under a body of specific laws.
Yours faithfully,
Tarron Khemraj
