Dear Editor,
I refer to an article in the New York Times dated July 5, titled, “In Sudan, a secret meeting and public rage propelled a power-sharing deal.” I think that is a significant step for Sudan, enraged citizens should be applauded for seeking to influence their destiny through the passions in their hearts, and the clarity in their minds. With great regret, I submit that such surging ingredients in Guyanese hearts and minds are just not there; not at any strength; not through any coherence of energies; not in any priority of focus and determination; and not aimed at those who enslave on knees.
First, I encourage all Guyanese (especially PPP and PNC followers) to appreciate the New York Times: “this week the protest leaders and their military foes did something unusual: they sat down in a room face-to-face, and within two days hammered out a power-sharing deal to run Sudan until elections can be held in just over three years.” Though the local contexts are somewhat different, I restate my familiar posture: the adversarial (more accurately warring) parties in this country need to (must) sit down at arm’s length and eyeball to eyeball and close out some sharing agreement first to stabilize temporarily this society and then to finalize a binding mechanism for governance.
The local parties-PNC, PPP-must huddle (no interruption, no food, locked door) and only emerge after settling and executing a done deal on the way forward. The Sudanese decided on an interlude of three years; I think that Guyana needs two. Two to fix a ballooned pair of testicles, bilaterally cancerous breasts, a national heart whose ejection fraction is way below par, and a national brain plagued with countless malignant lesions. That is how much of a basket case this country is at present.
Editor, this intra-power-sharing stopgap regime is all about the constitution. As everyone should know by now, it is not fit to toss in the garbage bin, would be rejected by any self-respecting dumpsite. In view of the damage and humiliations inflicted it has to be subject to a public bonfire once and for all, and a new start from scratch be made. All of the insoluble matters and deceiving ambiguities and escapist subterfuges must be discarded and an honest-to-god approach and effort be initiated to come up with a wholly new document that embraces the fears and aspirations and hoped-for collective destiny that is so much bandied about, never worked upon, but has to be delivered. That has to be the centerpiece of this nation’s constitutional visions; or else it is the same dog and pony show that even the animals treat with total disrespect.
A quick handful of my own priorities would be: reduction in presidential and parliamentary immunities; greater accountability of the judiciary; impeachment provisions for errant electoral servants; terms limits for political parties; more clearly defined and empowered commissions; political parties must reflect population ethnic demographics; a Bill of Rights for citizens; and a compendium of hard, unalterable interpretations. This is what is meant; close the door on legalistic shenanigans (utter foolishness mostly) future divisiveness and regional and diplomatic embarrassments. The draft constitution would then have to be ratified by at least 70% of the eligible electorate. Let this truth be faced: no single party in this country is going to materially reform the constitution and for all the known self-serving reasons.
The New York Times article noted that, “The protest leaders involved in the negotiations did have to make a significant concession.” It was further pointed out that other nonpolitical groups and foreign pressure contributed in bringing about the gathering and finalizing. Both sides in the Guyanese political rift valley have to be ready to make significant concessions today on moratoriums, shared governance composition, timeline and deadline, and default mechanism, among many others. Otherwise going nowhere and achieving nothing.
Separately, Guyanese can agree on corruption -but not when their own is doing the stealing. Citizens have a grave concern about crime -but not when the victims are the hated other (or the perpetrators are theirs). The populace profess publicly abhorrence for racial bigotry, but privately support immovably racist politics, racist tendencies, and racist results. Thus, the groundswell of burning anger is never unitary but always fragmented and feebly forlorn. That is why cunning politicians prey upon fears and divisions, and prosper from the national treasury. The degree of scorching anger that should be directed together at both political nemeses (PNC and PPP) is simply not there. Repeat: not there.
That is why Guyana is where it is. There is pretense that one party or the other could lead the nation forward successfully. That is the biggest lie (a jackass masquerading as a joke) and the longest running one, too. It has traction; it sells; it is treasured. And that is what has destroyed and will continue to destroy if given the usual credence and unswerving devotion. It is a recipe for national tragedy. My last word to Guyanese is: learn from the Sudanese. At least, look at self and say: something different was tried; a different path was insisted upon; and there is hope that a more inclusive future could come.
Yours faithfully,
GHK Lall
