As harbingers of the fast approaching electoral season there were two noteworthy developments in recent weeks.

The first was the declaration by a group of citizens that they had launched a process to create a broad partnership to contest next year’s general elections. While those behind this initiative are not yet known to the public what is gratifying is that citizens are endeavouring to breathe life into the laudatory but thus far elusive aims of Article 13 of the Constitution and that they intend to insert themselves into space that has been so zealously and depressingly occupied for decades by the political behemoths and their accumulated baggage.

A draft protocol and six principles have been identified by the group of citizens to guide their business. The principles are as follows.

* The interests of the Guyanese people as a whole shall be paramount at all times and deliberation on matters of race, ethnicity, gender, religion or status shall always support and further the application of this principle.

* Standards of political behaviour demand the rejection of all attempts to coerce or manipulate in any way the free and transparent election of officials and representatives of all organizations signing the protocol.

* That in contemplating the most appropriate model for the future management of the country’s affairs “account should be taken of experiences of the past 30 years when candidates of both major political parties occupied the office of the Executive President where power is over-centralized”.

* That taking account of the distinctions in the functions of Parliament, the Executive and the Judiciary, thought should be given to recommending that the person performing the functions of Head of State must represent “at all times only the interests of all Guyanese and must act in strict accordance with the dictates of the Constitution”.

* That in mulling the qualities of prospective presidential candidates for the Partnership “the Committee shall also consider independent persons of proven integrity who are honest and always able to question themselves”. Further, candidates must acknowledge that differences of opinion are an ethical imperative that demonstrates respect for others.

* That following the crafting of a register of recommended presidential candidates, the committee will consider the carrying out of a professional opinion poll as one means of obtaining the views of citizens about the most suitable person to become Head of State.

It is an interesting step. When one considers the hype generated and the impact that the pre-1992 pressure group GUARD had on the political milieu there is no reason why citizens in a different context could not help to cut a trail to a more united country, better governance and a modern democracy. It was the now ruling PPP, no doubt aware of the impact that GUARD was having, which struck a deal with then GUARD leading light, Prime Minister Sam Hinds leading to the formation of the PPP’s election winning alliance with a civic group and consequently the death knell for the reform movement.
This citizens group now has to show that it has the ability to manage the process that it has adumbrated and galvanise interest in it. Already it might have been slightly unbalanced by the second event worthy of note – the AFC’s decision to rule out the prospect of a coalition with either the PPP/C or the PNCR. The partnership is quite clearly looking for a grand alliance to challenge the PPP/C at the upcoming elections but it now seems that any type of partnership would have to subsist with the either the PNCR or the AFC on the outside.

The AFC decision achieved four significant outcomes in one fell swoop. First, it disarmed the ruling PPP/C of a key line of attack against the AFC i.e. the AFC is a splinter of the PNCR and will do a deal with Congress Place and therefore a vote for it is a vote for the PPP/C’s longstanding nemesis. The intensity of attacks on the AFC may reflect the feedback that the PPP/C’s machinery is picking up from the grass roots.

Second, the pressure and public glare are now fully on the PNCR or more precisely its leader, Mr Robert Corbin. In the backdrop of a disastrous performance at the 2006 polls and uninspired leadership since then, the PNCR is acutely aware that it risks further relegation unless it finds another way to reinvent itself apart from the convenient adding of letters to its name at elections. What will it do now? It is left with other parties with just one seat in total in parliament and not very high profile. That will hardly give it a cosmetic makeover notwithstanding the contention that it requires root and branch reform. Will it then have to fully engage with citizens groups like the one advocating a partnership where it is integrated into a larger body and at risk of losing its individuality? What might its members and traditional constituency say about this? Having faced years of challenges and discontent with his leadership of the party, Mr Corbin will not be able to put off his critics for much longer as the party has to allow times for its sails to find a potent wind. He has professed disinterest in being the next presidential candidate of the party but this is completely nullified by his unwillingness to let go of the reins of leadership of the party in so far as presenting a viable image to the public next year.

Third, the decision refocuses the AFC itself on the task ahead after evident deep-seated divisions in its ranks over important issues like the rotation of leadership of the party. While the decision to discount an alliance with the PNCR was not unanimous, the dissenting faction is clearly aware that it works with the decision of the party or it goes elsewhere. This should now enable the party to channel its energies into the campaign ahead.

Fourth, the decision allows the AFC to argue more credibly to the public and to be apprehended in such manner that it represents a real break from the entrenched duopoly that has led the country in one form or another for the last 57 years without this leadership yielding the unity, social advancement, political quietude, economic prosperity, vision and future-building that the country needs.

These developments do have the potential to instigate positive change and will no doubt be observed closely by the public.