Tacuma Ogunseye’s call for African Guyanese to militantly campaign for power-sharing if the PPP/C wins the 2011 general elections drew both criticism and endorsement, and reignited discussions of race and governance. Ogunseye, an Executive Member of the African Cultural and Development Association (ACDA), spoke with Stabroek News last week on the now controversial call, among other issues. The following is an edited transcript of the interview.
Stabroek News: You spoke at a public meeting on the East Coast where it was reported that you called for massive protests by African Guyanese, if a new PPP-led government did not agree to power sharing. Some have accused you of calling for violence. What did you say and what did you mean?
Ogunseye: Those persons who have accused me of calling for violence, at least initially, they did not hear my full speech and are going on what they believe the ERC [Ethnic Relations Commission] and the government said. I did call for massive protests in African communities to reinforce our claim for shared governance and I did make a point that we know what the PNC will do if they win the elections, which is move to shared governance. I also said that once the elections result is known and the PPP emerges victorious, then we should intensify the struggle; [including] massive protest in the African Guyanese community to press for a compromise on shared governance and a national government. I believe this is ACDA’s position as I understood it; it still is ACDA’s position. Nothing about this speaks to violence; I never used the word violence because we in ACDA don’t have a history of promoting violence.
You also said you expected that the mainly African security forces would not put down protests by African Guyanese. Can that not be interpreted as suggesting the security forces neglect their duty and enable the removal of the government?
I said that once the African Guyanese community rises up fighting for shared governance as a platform—as distinct from criminality. Our judgment in ACDA is that the army would not shoot people down ‘willy-nilly.’ This is important to us Africans, because every community I’ve been in and engaged our people about protesting the excesses of this government, the issue comes up about whether the army will shoot or not. I made the point that our sisters and brothers would not shoot us. I’ll take this further and say that I did not address the army directly. There are times in this country, under the Burnham dictatorship, where I addressed the army directly telling them they must see the sugar workers as our Indian brothers and sisters and not yield to the regime; this was during the time of their struggles. Interestingly, Burnham and the PNC never viewed what I said as sedition, but in this case no direct address was made. I made a similar address at brother [Ronald] Waddell’s death anniversary at Mocha this year and I knew since then they have been looking for something to charge me with. I stand by the observation I made at BV, which is that the army has not so degenerated that they will go and shoot Africans if we go out and protest peacefully and this is a fair assessment, unless they prove otherwise.
In a racially polarised society and moreso at elections time, do you recognise that there is a risk that calls such as yours can incite people and inflame tensions?
In any society there are political risks when you make such a call, depending on how it is interpreted. The call for shared governance is not a new call; the call for massive protests in Guyana is not new either. In fact, there has been an ongoing debate since the PNC led protests in the years following the 1992 polls. The issues of African protests have been treated as if automatically they will lead to violence, whereas an Indian-led protest on the Corentyne is not treated the same way by the press and the state. We as African Guyanese have been struggling with this perception that every African protest creates violence and we have to find a way of defeating that. If we accept it, then we will do nothing to press for a redress of our situation. We in ACDA don’t believe our call will automatically lead to violence because it is situated in a genuine effort at national reconciliation and sharing of power between the races; an end to the political tug-of-war.
What form of government are you agitating for and are the people you say you represent in favour of this? Where is the evidence of their calling for this?
That is the exact reason why ACDA believes that we need to go to the street corners and bring people out. We know that African people want a resolution of this problem, and given the way the PPP has conducted politics after 1992, a lot of Africans feel marginalised and are suffering. We believe Africans have bought into ACDA and the PNC’s argument that the way forward is shared governance at the executive level. Africans are fully behind it but because of fear there is no political manifestation to support it, which is why the question you asked is relevant. This year, which the UN declared in recognition of people of African descent, we believe offers us the best opportunity to press the struggle for shared governance and it is the year we believe the government’s hands are tied because people are watching. ACDA’s meeting was the beginning of our campaign, which would’ve gone around the country in a two or three-month period to a number of African communities. The campaign is to bring the manifestation by bringing African bodies in the streets.
What model would executive power sharing take, for example, in detail? How does one avoid gridlock given the inherent suspicions and divisions? Shouldn’t there be confidence-building or a further revised constitution before power sharing?
The PPP always argues that we need to build confidence and they never say how long this process is going to take – 15, 20 years? This is how a party in power behaves; even though they recognise the value in shared governance, they are not prepared to share right now. ACDA has a model and the PNC has a developed model, but we in ACDA have not been pushing our model because we believe the final model will have to be done through negotiations; we are not pressing our model at this stage and it will also be shaped by where the balance lies. To share with you some of ACDA’s thinking, I’ll say that we support a constitution which empowers the Prime Minister with more executive authority; he has a veto and the President has a veto. If the PM comes from one race, the President would come from another and this would be determined by how the votes go. We also think the ministries need to be looked at and be balanced between the parties holding the presidential and prime ministerial positions. This is not a comprehensive account but it indicates what we are calling for; it supports an end to the winner-take-all system.
Has the PNCR and the opposition in general advocated sufficiently for power-sharing?
Not sufficiently. Mr [Desmond] Hoyte pushed the party on the issue and since then the party has been engaging the PPP as part of the national discourse on this question. The PNC has consistently called for shared governance but they have never backed up the call with a single demonstration. They restate the rhetoric, but they have not called one public meeting on this issue. My view is the PNC and the wider opposition has not done enough to press the government on this issue. ACDA had concluded that you need to go to African communities and mobilise them to make a political statement; give the campaign teeth.
Since your call do you see any sign that the PNC or the AFC are moving in this direction? Do you see any signs from the government or hardening of positions?
I don’t believe the AFC has never embraced shared governance, the PNC has. The PPP is behaving as I expect them to as a party in power, which is not willing to share an inch. But if they see massive numbers of Africans in the streets demanding shared governance, they are likely to embrace the call. The PPP is a tough political bunch and they don’t seem to have the vision to understand that before you carry the country to the brink, it is better we reconcile in an atmosphere of peace. I think only pressure and tension will force them to understand.
What kind of constitutional reforms would you like to see?
The major constitutional renovation I think we need is a reform of the governance system from a winner-take-all to one of shared governance. If you don’t correct that all the other things are like a waste of time, which is why we are concentrating on the main plank and that is governance. What happens after elections and how the country is governed is important. We only have a few months to “bell this cat.”
What role is there for the disapora?
Some role does exist for the disapora in the country, I believe this but I don’t know how exactly this would be fashioned. Still, I would agree in principle that we must recognise that there are just as much Guyanese outside the country as there are inside the country. They represent a pool of resources and talent, and in a country short on resources and talent we would be making a critical mistake if we don’t find a way to constitutionally give the disapora some say in the national affairs of the country.
What about the plight of African Guyanese people? Have they taken enough responsibility for their own lives and have they tried to bond enough in their villages and communities to win economic and political success? What have groups like ACDA been doing?
This is an old question since in the days of ASCRIA, which is an African organisation which pre-dates ACDA. We have always had to address the question of African cultural consciousness and I think it is fair to say that the historical process, which has stripped Africans of their cultural, spiritual and religious identity, that process has left us with some deficiency that affects us in every area of our lives; economic, social, personal and political. I believe our economic distress is the structural and historical problems. If you look at the way in which Africans behave in some political circumstances, you will find that Africans are more willing to engage in negative self-criticism even when it is not justified. Look at the Buxton resistance and the Roger Khan saga; everyday you could reach Africans who will condemn what the elements in Buxton were doing and there are Indians in the market where I work and very rare they will ever condemn Roger Khan’s criminality. We as a people self-destruct and I think our conditioning has made us over-critical when we need not to be. But we have been working to strengthen the African resolve for 15 years. A lot of the work is not visible but we have been consistent and it is almost on a daily basis.
