PNC should reject the AFC’s selections for parliament
Last Sunday, the AFC selected its nine parliamentarians and it is a sordid violation of the constitution, elections criteria and moral laws. The selection is amorphous and illogical. This country will now see if David Granger has even an ounce of leadership qualities in him. By compelling moral laws, he has to reject those choices
First, five of them are from Georgetown, not the wide territory of Region Four but the city of Georgetown. They are Khemraj Ramjattan, Raphael Trotman, Sherod Duncan, Cathy Hughes and David Patterson. All five have lived in Georgetown the past 30 years, registered to vote in Georgetown the past 30 years, and do not belong to any AFC group in any part of the entire country except Georgetown. Ramjattan does not belong to the Region Four Regional Management Committee (RMC) since the birth of the AFC. He never belonged to the Region Six RCM. In 2015, it was Charrandass Persaud, and not Moses Nagamootoo and Ramjattan, who represented Berbice in the House.
Secondly, the group’s shape constitutes a violation of the constitution. It should contain 30 percent of women. There are only two women – Juretha Fernandes and Cathy Hughes. Two founding members of the party who are executive members were not chosen – Nicola Trotman and Beverley Alert.
Thirdly, Region Four has six selectees out of nine – the five named above and Ricky Ramsaroop from the East Coast. This has serious implications for the analysis of politics. If the AFC has chosen five politicians from Georgetown to be in the House, then, since your MPs are drawn from where your votes come from, it means that in the 2020 poll, the AFC received significant ballots from urban constituencies which traditionally vote for the PNC. It is possible then, that the PNC lost heavily to the AFC in Georgetown?
Fourthly, if out of the 10 Regions in Guyana, the AFC designates six of its nine names from Region Four, then this is an admission that the AFC is virtually dead in the other Regions in Guyana. In 2011, it got substantial votes in Regions Two, Three, Five and Six. Now since the PNC’s electoral strength is in Region Four and the AFC chose six out of its nines MPs from Region Four, the AFC is simply arguing that its strength lies in Region Four. So, the possibility is that in the 2020 election, the PNC endured severe losses not to the PPP but the AFC.
Fifthly, the designations contain one representative from Region Two – Haimraj Rajkumar; one from Region 10, Devon Sears; one from Region Seven – Juretha Fernandes. There is no AFC politician going into parliament from Regions One, Three, Five, Six, Eight and Nine. If the AFC is entering parliament without an MP from Regions Five and Six or from the total Berbice area, then the AFC is openly conceding that it has no support from areas that propelled it into the limelight from 2006. It would be political masturbation of the worst kind if Ramjattan says that his presence in the House symbolizes the Berbice presence.
Sixthly, in the last parliament, the AFC had two members who were from the Indigenous community – Valerie Garrido Lowe and Michael Carrington. There is none with Fernandes being Portuguese. Seventhly, with six parliamentarians, no one was selected to cover the East Bank of Demerara.
We come now to the gang of five. The five were the people who had complete control over the AFC. All decisions emanated from them. They were Dominic Gaskin, Ramjattan, Trotman, Hughes and Patterson. Gaskin is gone. There are now four left. These four have to justify to the Guyanese people why they should return to Parliament where they have been since 2006.
If the PNC adheres to Granger’s 10 criteria for obtaining a seat in parliament, the AFC falls down badly. The 10 criteria include youth, gender and demography. How can the gang of four justify all of them going into the House? Ramjattan will say he is leader. Trotman will say he is Chairman. Patterson will say he is General Secretary. Hughes will justify herself by the gender criterion.
But Hughes was there since 2006. Why not give another woman a chance? Why must the Leader, Chairman and General Secretary all go to parliament when all three were there since 2006? Why not rotate the slate to include representation from Regions Three, Five and Six. And why not adhere to the constitutional rule of 30 percent for women. By next week, the AFC will hand in its submission to the Leader of the List – Granger. Will Granger at last show testicular valour in political leadership?
(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)
