This article will reach the editor at its usual time, which will be long before the results of the 2015 general and regional elections are even informally known. I believe that this is opportune for it allows me to consider beforehand a few of the challenges that will confront whichever party wins.
The APNU/AFC coalition predicts that it will win by a landslide. I believe that the results will be much closer, although, for reasons repeated ad nauseam in this column, I hope it does come out on top.
Generally, I trust that whatever the results, all parties and their supporters will accept them as the outcome of a process that they entered into with eyes wide open, and with the expectation that the losing side will accept the results as if they were the victors.
But we should not be the proverbial ostriches: twenty three years of PPP/C rule has achieved little in terms of building ethnic unity. So far as most Africans are concerned, PPP rule has brought nothing but discrimination and massive corruption. Furthermore, in the process of electioneering, that party has openly sought to exploit its own governance deficiencies by increasing the ethnic tension for its own political purposes.
Therefore, the possibility of there being unrest if the PPP/C should win cannot be discounted. The leadership of the parties should be cognisant of this and have plans in place to maintain the rule of law.
If the PPP wins these elections, it will most likely attempt to proceed in its pre-2011 manner. As such, and even if the transition is not immediately smooth, uneasy coexistence between it and the opposition is the best that we could realistically expect.
Nonetheless, a win for the PPP/C would be a demonstration that Guyana has not transitioned much beyond its essentially bicommunal nature. And notwithstanding the personal security dilemma of its leadership and its fear that it will lose control of the state in any coalition arrangement, the PPP should be bold and seek to institute policies to gradually form this country into a progressive nation.
Win or lose, if the PPP is to take anything away from these elections it must be that, far from mitigating ethnic tension, its long stay in government has led to its exacerbation. Thus the party must relinquish its drive to dominate politics in Guyana and be more proactive in trying to negotiate the security problems of its elites.
To begin with, immediately upon winning government, it must signal in practical ways its intention to develop a more open and transparent relationship with the opposition and a willingness to establish an inclusive constitutional convention to consider comprehensive reforms.
If the party does not make these kinds of concessions it will leave the leadership of the opposition with no option but to, at the very least, develop and implement peaceful and non-violent approaches to establish itself in a proper position to adequately represent the interest of its supporters.
A win for the APNU/AFC coalition would be a positive indication that the political dynamics in Guyana have shifted significantly. If the PPP/C does not win with the level of ethnic agitation it descended to, politically Guyana will have arrived at the door of liberal democracy.
For me, the major attraction of the APNU/AFC coalition was its promise to move directly to constitutional reform if it wins the election. But the nature of the reforms that are required will possibly be different depending on whether it wins or loses.
That aside, I want to take issue with the promise the coalition made that if it wins, ‘PPP/C’s members could be invited to join the cabinet’. Note should be taken of the conditional nature of this commitment and I believe that any effort to implement it will prove highly impractical, divisive and politically dangerous.
If the coalition is sincere about this commitment, both the process of attaining it and the benefits to be derived therefrom will be different depending upon what it means by national unity government.
In my opinion, a proper national unity government can only result from negotiations between the elites of the coalition and the PPP. It would not be a national unity government for the former to simply cherry-pick among and incorporate in their government pliable members of the PPP/C. This approach will not lead to an iota of unity and will be very divisive.
Perhaps seeking to elaborate on the manifesto promise, Dr. David Hinds, a member of APNU/AFC, told us something of the possible structure and benefits of a government of national unity (GNU).
‘First, the GNU will ensure that all voters feel their votes count for something. It will be the fairest government Guyana has ever had. No bloc of votes will have more power than other blocs. In a GNU 48% will mean and act like 48%; 40% will mean 40%; and 10% will mean and act like 10%. This will be a drastic change from what we now have whereby the PPP has 48% of the votes but controls 100% of the ministries’ (The attractions of a government of national unity. SN 01/05/2015).
All parties and communities will be at the executive decision-making table. However, given that APNU/AFC have already distributed the important executive positions between themselves, what will happen if the PPP/C wins 48% of the votes? It is impractical to believe that at this stage, the PPP/C can possibly be given just under 50% of the cabinet or any number of positions that would be reasonably commensurate with its electoral support.
This promise becomes even more questionable if, during the negotiations the PPP/C presents the new government with – from the opposition standpoint – some of its more questionable leaders. Given the coalition commitment to always act morally and legally, how will this situation be sensibly resolved?
Finally, in its manifesto the coalition suggested that a new constitution should establish a 15% threshold of seats in the national assembly for parties to participate in a government of national unity. I believe that this suggestion was intended to accommodate the contention that there should always be a reasonable political opposition. But as things now stand between them; the coalition and the PPP are likely to gain more than 95% of the seats in the national assembly!
For parties just out of a bruising political battle this would not only create a Trojan horse situation but would also leave the country without an opposition. If the PPP loses the elections, it should be left to renew itself in opposition and provide vigorous leadership during the next constitutional reform process.
