Dear Editor,
Charrandass Persaud’s vote in support of the Opposition-sponsored No Confidence Motion (NCM) has not only created legal turmoil in Guyana but has also exposed the flaws of the Cummingsburg Accord, a factor that could hinder any of the new, emerging political parties from forming a coalition with either of the two major parties in the future, as long as the current constitution prevails. As well, Mr Persaud has revealed a fissure in the AFC that has been kept under control by Messrs Ramjattan’s and Nagamootoo’s quest for power.
The Cummingsburg Accord was a “gentleman’s” agreement (based on trust) rather than a legally binding document. It was geared for public relations to convince AFC’s supporters to vote for the coalition. It could not supersede the constitution which means that the President, once elected, could ignore or circumvent the requirements of the Accord, if he so desires. After the elections (2015), the public realized that Messrs Ramjattan and Nagamootoo were outmaneuvered. They were given the positions they requested, as per the Accord, but their responsibilities were diluted. Functions previously carried out by their predecessors were removed from their portfolios and handed to APNU ministers. In particular, many political analysts have written about the stripping of Prime Minister Nagamootoo’s responsibilities and transferring them to Mr Harmon, Minister, Office of the President.
Despite public protestations to the contrary by the AFC, this set the stage for subservience of the AFC to APNU. Over the ensuing years, the AFC’s leadership never asserted their independence and supported every policy decision of the Government, decisions which were seen as positions of APNU or rather the PNC. Guyana Times of October 5, 2016 notes “What is now clearly evident in Guyanese politics is the fact that the AFC is neither a third force nor an influential force in the governing coalition. It is more like a spent force”. Subsequently, in November 2017, after supporting President Granger’s choice of octogenarian, retired Justice James Patterson, as GECOM chairman over names on three consecutive lists submitted by the Leader of the Opposition, AFC’s leadership faced a rebellion by the United States (US) and Canadian Chapters. The Chairman of the US Chapter was so incensed he complained in an email to the party leaders “…You are seen by the common man as being treated as a step child or a poodle in the coalition”. Also, columnists Dr David Hinds and Freddie Kissoon have written extensively on the subservience of the AFC to APNU. In his October 10, 2018 column in the Kaieteur News, Kissoon, citing Hinds, wrote “… the AFC bought into all the policies its partner, the APNU was pursuing and pursued” and continued “The AFC became dead meat…”.
In explaining his decision to vote in favour of the NCM, Charrandass Persaud states that the lives of sugar workers in his village in Berbice were destroyed (by the Government) “and I can’t live with that”; he was incensed at Minister Volda Lawrence’s statements that she would only employ PNC (People’s National Congress Reform) people and the AFC Leader’s defence of her; and he was upset by the vote on the Prime Minister’s Pension Bill, giving a former Prime Minister, Mr Hamilton Green, an upgraded pension. According to him the AFC parliamentarians have little say on Government decisions and they are expected to say yes to everything.
AFC and APNU leaders have claimed that Persaud never expressed any dissatisfaction with the coalition’s policy and are now branding him a “traitor”. Some are claiming that he was paid for his “yes” vote. He has refuted the accusation of bribery and the police are now investigating this matter. It is hoped that the investigation will be swift and the result made public promptly.
Regarding the claim by his former colleagues that he never expressed any dissatisfaction with the AFC or the coalition, his nondisclosure is understandable. He was aware that the AFC leaders consistently supported/defended the Government’s/President Granger’s position. Even the rebellion of the US and Canadian Chapters did not cause the leaders to change their views. As well, Messrs Ramjattan and Nagamootoo did not speak up when their own portfolios were gutted. In such an environment, it is unreasonable to expect that a backbencher, Mr Persaud, to voice his dissatisfaction. Had he done so, it is very likely he would have been considered a dissident and recalled earlier. As a lawyer, he would be aware of the weakness of the Cummingsburg Accord and he concluded that his party leaders were unlikely to support him.
The fissure in the AFC, mentioned earlier, developed soon after the 2006 elections when then party leader Mr Trotman gave a parliamentary seat previously promised to Indian Guyanese Gomattie Singh to an African Guyanese. Mr Ramjattan turned a blind eye to this slight when Ms Singh complained to him. Subsequently, when it was Mr Ramjattan’s turn to lead the party as per the party’s founding principle of alternating its leader, Mr Trotman dissented. After Ramjattan assumed the leadership role, Trotman claimed poor health and was rarely seen on the campaign trail for the 2011 elections. Again, after parliament was prorogued by President Donald Ramotar, Ramjattan unlike Trotman, was not supportive of a coalition with APNU, claiming the AFC will be “dead meat” if it entered into a coalition. However, he later recanted, claiming that he did so to prevent the party from splitting.
While Mr Ramjattan has worked diligently and made compromises to avoid a split in the AFC, Charrandass has pointed out that concerns of its Indian Guyanese supporters were neglected. In a recent column, Dr David Hinds notes “The AFC’s loyalty to the coalition has cost it the Indian Guyanese base that was the basis for its value to the coalition”. Charrandass has now exposed a plastered- over schism in the party’s base and this will likely impact the next general elections. Once again we are likely to see a return to voting along racial lines which means a contest between the two behemoths of Guyanese politics (the PPP and PNC/APNU), to the detriment of the new parties. Hopefully the Liberal and Justice Party of Mr Lenox Shuman, if it retains its independence, will gain support in the Amerindian community, hold the balance of power in the new parliament, and work to bring about constitutional reform.
Yours faithfully,
Harry Hergash
