PPP/C presidential candidate Donald Ramotar’s proclaimed satisfaction with the constitutional arrangements for the country’s political system is worrying, according to AFC leader Raphael Trotman, who believes that such a position shows disregard for those who currently feel excluded.
“No political leader who truly cares about all of Guyana’s peoples can and should express confidence in an instrument that is not working for and serving the people,” Trotman told Stabroek News. He said he believed that anyone who expresses contentment with the constitutional arrangements for governance is showing absolute disregard and contempt for the thousands who feel excluded.
He spoke on the issue of governance and a government of national unity during a recent interview, where he offered his perspectives within the context of what has been said by the main opposition PNCR and, on a more controversial note, statements reportedly made by African Cultural and Development Association (ACDA) Executive Tacuma Ogunseye.
Trotman said he believed that Ramotar can be persuaded to acknowledge the cries and concerns of a significant section of the society, despite his utterances on the country’s constitutional arrangements.
Ramotar has said that there are unlikely to be any sweeping changes to the country’s constitution if the PPP is re-elected into office. When asked about possible constitutional reform under his tenure, he said he did not have a general problem with the existing constitution. Ramotar has noted that substantial amounts of money had been spent on reviewing the 1980 constitution and the changes were unanimously passed by the National Assembly in 2001. “I don’t think we have a bad constitution…. I think our constitution is probably superior to many constitutions in the world,” he said, while adding that the public and the parliament had indicated the same by their support of the constitution.
But Trotman argued that the country has a crisis of governance, and according to him the Westminster model variant that Guyana has adopted for its political system is not working. “I can quite understand Mr Ogunseye’s statements, even though I feel they were ill-timed, as they speak to a growing level of frustration and anger on the part of thousands of disaffected Guyanese who not only feel that Guyana is not being governed fairly, but also they are distressed at the manner in which policies are crafted and implemented,” he said. He opined that Ogunseye was brave enough to echo the sentiment on the ground in many established quarters.
Ogunseye was either very foolish or very brave, Trotman further said, while adding that distress continues despite the fact government can point to massive infrastructural development such as housing, roads, schools, and bridges. People largely accept the social development of Guyana is impeded, he continued, while noting that the fact that society has turned on itself is manifested by the countless cases of murder, suicide, and domestic violence. “Roads, bridges and hospitals cannot save us from ourselves,” Trotman said. He argued that it is against this background this year’s elections will truly be a watershed event. “…As we decide either to cast off the last vestiges of colonialism, meaning the combative and divisive adversarial political system that pits, for the most part, ethnically-based parties against each other, and sit down as responsible people and accept that we are our worst enemies and need something that is truly indigenous and different, or we can continue to bury our heads in the sand and agree to retain the status quo,” he declared.
He said too that despite the pronouncements by Ramotar, the expressions by AFC candidate Khemraj Ramjattan and PNCR candidate David Granger that they will see the abolition of the executive presidency together with the requisite reforms to make the National Assembly, Regional Democratic Councils and Neighbourhood Democratic Councils truly representative and autonomous, not only captured his attention but has given him hope that change is alive and coming. However, he observed that Granger’s recent endorsement of a government of national unity needs to be cautiously embraced. Trotman explained that it is unwise to endorse something a political opponent says or does without examining the context in which it was stated.
Still, he believed that Granger has turned the PNCR towards an inevitable appointment with healing and reconciliation. “It is now necessary for us to get the PPP/C to agree to do the same,” he added.
Trotman said that no one political party or section of civil society has all the necessary resources present for the effective and cohesive management of the affairs of state. He pointed out that it is in this context that his statements over the years about any future participation in the status quo politics within the National Assembly were made. “I believe that we cannot engage in elections just for the sake of having elections so that we can have the label of ‘democratic’ placed on us,” he said.
A government of national unity and reconstruction is the only sane way to, and to comprise the best of those who want to be a part of it, Trotman argued. He noted that every major stakeholder should be invited, but not forced or manipulated to be a part.
The question is often asked whether the AFC is willing to work with either party after the elections results are in, he said, while noting, “The answer is a resounding yes.” He called the AFC the bridge between the two major parties and not their destroyer. “In this context, therefore, we must always be willing to work with all parties; yet we recognise the inherent consequences of appearing to side with one as against the other,” he added.
Trotman said his focus now is not only to prepare the AFC for the upcoming elections, but more importantly to get the contesting parties to agree to a new form of governance in the immediate period afterwards. He lamented that President Bharrat Jagdeo’s pitch for an enhanced framework for political cooperation, following the last general elections, was unfortunately a “damp sqib that did not go off with a bang.” He added, “We need to get all of our presidential candidates to commit to real changes; changes that start with the removal of the executive presidency and end with the power being given back to the people at the village council level.”
