Dear Editor,
I have been following the controversy about third term leadership in the Alliance for Change (AFC) of which I have been a member since its formation. The reason I became involved is because Guyana needed a change from the old racial politics. This party was the best choice because it catered for the six races; it was multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and it was founded on the principal of honesty and credibility. There seems to be a glitch in relation to the rotation of the national executive, regions and groups seeking two consecutive terms in office. The point here as I know it from the constitution is that once a member is in good financial standing for a minimum of two months immediately preceding the conference, he/she shall have the right to participate and vote to be elected to any office. This means that he or she can contest to be the leader, chairman, vice chairman, general secretary or one of the 12 committee members.
However, according to Article 19,(1) the various senior positions of the AFC, including those in the national executive, regions and groups ought to be rotated as far as possible, so that no member is allowed to serve more than two consecutive terms in the same office. Whether this section of the constitution was interpreted correctly to mean that the leader of the party can run for a third term, is something which I doubt. For me it is clear that s/he cannot seek re-election according to Article 19,(1). The word ‘ought’ to my mind is vague. The framers of the constitution should have used a more explicit word which wouldn’t confuse the members.
If we are talking about broader activism in the leadership, then we should allow other members to hold the mantle of leadership in the party and not behave like the other parties. The AFC has qualified members within the rank and file who I am sure can serve in all positions and capacities, not only at the party level but at governmental level.
Whatever the outcome, it’s the delegates’ votes which will decide who will be the next leader of the party for the next 2 years, as well as all the other office-bearers.This party won 5 seats at the first election which was due to many factors, including the genuine impact of its multi-ethnic and multi-class slate of candidates.
The leaders must find the means of cooperation, and allow the youths to hold the torch of leadership, including the rank and file. This I believe, will give more inclusiveness to the membership of the party. Reforms must pave the way for a revolutionary approach to the problem of leadership. However, this must not become a recipe for opportunism; it must be creatively applied. The party leaders must firmly condemn anyone for fostering divisive politics that would further undermine party cohesion.
With the upcoming National Conference we must avoid any division in our own camp; our party must work more militantly and not just accept that it is business as usual. I am convinced that beneath the veneer of calm the enemies of democracy are planning and working overtime.
Yours faithfully,
Mohamed Khan
