How the PPP is degrading Guyana’s democracy

The People’s Progressive Party (PPP) has deliberately degraded Guyana’s democratic institutions over the past 21 years.  The current rash of rural rallies to celebrate the party’s 21st anniversary in government cannot conceal the damage that has been done to parliamentary democracy and local government. The PPP, at the national level, wrecked the work and hopes of former US President Jimmy Carter – the man who helped it to leap back into office. Carter visited Guyana for the last time nine years ago in 2004. He saw how his democratic dreams had degenerated into a nightmare of despotism during Bharrat Jagdeo’s presidency.  Carter complained then that, instead of attaining the goal of inclusive and shared governance, “the Guyanese government remains divided with a ‘winner-takes-all’ concept that continues to polarise many aspects of the nation’s life.” Jimmy Carter had carefully diagnosed the PPP disease as that of political paranoia and monomania. The PPP’s obsession with controlling autonomous institutions was documented in the report of Sir Michael Davies who came here as the Commonwealth’s Senior Parliamentary Staff Advisor to the Guyana Parliament. Davies conducted a deep, detailed study of the National Assembly, that most important institution of democratic governance. His findings – entitled Needs Assessment of the Guyana National Assembly – turned out to be an incisive indictment on the manner in which the Assembly was being managed during the speakership of Ralph Ramkarran and under Bharrat Jagdeo’s presidency.

Started in 1992 Davies exposed the means, mechanisms and methods that the PPP had devised to undermine the Assembly’s independence. He revealed the fact that “meetings of the [National] Assembly are entirely at the whim of the Executive,” that both the staffing and the budget of the National Assembly are controlled by the [PPPC] Administration and that the work of the committees “is subject to frustration by the Executive.” He criticised the practice of submitting parliamentary Order Papers for sittings of the National Assembly to the Office of the President which, he says, “can and does strike out questions and motions which the Office [of the President] does not like.” That practice, he added, “apparently only started in 1992.” Davies noted that while the Administration appeared not to accept the assertion that “the scheduling of meetings of the Assembly was entirely in the hands of the Executive,” he had seen evidence of this. He noted that the Administration “allows the opposition few opportunities to debate policy or to consider bills.” He added, more precisely, “I was present at a meeting of the Parliamentary Management Committee on 1st February [2005] which was called at the request of Opposition members of the National Assembly expressly to demand a meeting of the Assembly to debate the flood situation and the government flatly refused to countenance a meeting for a further two weeks.”  Such is the PPP’s contempt for parliamentary democracy and the public interest.

Started in 1994 The PPP has disregarded the people’s genuine desire for local government elections which were last held in 1994. The PPP has been holding rallies in the villages to celebrate the so-called ‘return of democracy’ on 5th October. PPP ministers, however, spend their time speaking about the past but do not see the need to inform the nation about the future, particularly, about the implementation of reforms to enhance democracy. The PPP, at the local level, through the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development, has been doing its utmost to degrade democracy and disempower communities. President Ramotar’s decision to withhold assent to the four local government bills – the Local Government Commission Bill, the Local Government (Amendment) Bill, the Municipal and District Councils (Amendment) Bill and the Fiscal Transfers Bill – therefore, is part of a 21-year tradition. It is only the latest expression of the PPP’s contempt for local democracy. Ramotar had, since June 2012, declared his intention not to assent to any bills passed by the National Assembly without the agreement of the government side. The fate of the four local government bills passed by the National Assembly is evidence of the PPP’s resistance to democracy. The Constitution of Guyana requires that once a bill has been passed, it is sent “at the earliest opportunity” to the President who would then have 21 days to assent to it or refuse to do so. The PPP has exercised such a degree of control over the National Assembly that, when bills are passed, they are sent to the PPP-appointed Minister of Legal Affairs and Attorney General to receive a ‘certificate of assent’ before being forwarded to the President. This undemocratic process explains why bills passed on 7th August still had not been presented to the President by 7th October. The PPP has deliberately damaged the entire structure and system of local democracy. Ganga Persaud, Minister of Local Government and Regional Development, has been ruthlessly and systematically dismantling neighbourhood democratic councils for more than a year. He has been installing unrepresentative, hand-picked, pro-PPP interim management committees against the wishes of local residents. The PPP, clearly, is on an undemocratic campaign to prevent local government entities from functioning freely. It has discredited councillors with bogus ‘investigations’, invented pretexts to remove elected officials and replaced them with PPP placemen. The PPP continues, to this day, to damage, diminish and disparage important institutions and organs such as the Office of the Ombudsman and the Public Service Appellate Tribunal which are intended to protect the public from executive lawlessness.  It manages the state-owned media – Government Information Agency, Guyana National Newspapers Ltd., and National Communications Network – as if they were party propaganda organs. The PPP has deliberately degraded democracy during its 21 years in office. It is the Opposition’s obligation in the National Assembly to put an end to such degradation.