I stand by my view that there is incontrovertible evidence of empirical autocracy

Dear Editor,

Please allow me to refer to a piece published yesterday in the Government-run newspaper that purports to refute the evidence I marshalled about the existence of empirical autocracy in Guyana. I should simply like to make the following observations, respectfully:

First, it is a public service to comment about things that may be going wrong in governance. That gives an opportunity to Government to reflect, refute, or take corrective measures if needed. Surely, it is possible to exchange views respectfully. The tone of the correspondent in the government-run paper  casts the government in a negative light.

Second, while the paper concerned  is one run by the Government of the day, and carries articles written mainly by its attack squad, the Stabroek News has long established its reputation for professionalism and public service, and is Guyana’s paper of record. This is why I have written in it over the years. I believe that the Stabroek News seeks to act in good faith and without partisanship.

Third, the facts adduced by the Stabroek News, and which I cited,  are impeccable: Parliamentary committees hardly function and there is little consultation with the Opposition; there is incontrovertible written evidence of mismanagement in some government departments and services; and the leader of the ruling party himself is on record as calling for the rooting out of corruption in the procurement process.

Fourth, I labelled what is taking place empirical, or de-facto autocracy. I was careful not to pronounce on whether it was intentional autocracy – thereby giving the Government the benefit of the doubt.

Fifth, I stand by my view that there is incontrovertible evidence of empirical autocracy – all of which could be corrected by the Government if it cares to listen. 

Mine was an act of public service, as Guyanese of good faith will surely recognize.

Bishop Tutu famously advised us once: “If you are losing an argument, do not raise your voice; raise the quality of your argument instead.”

Yours respectfully,

Bertrand Ramcharan