Dear Editor,
It is clear to me that GECOM is in collusion with militant elements of the PNCR to rig the election. The entire system is compromised by GECOM. Mr. Allan Fenty’s letter (see SN: 17/03/2020) confirms my suspicion that incomplete SOPs will be part of the rigging exercise which CARICOM will likely unwittingly legitimize. I will not elaborate further.
It is now likely that former President Granger will soon be sworn in as communal leader of his ethnic constituency and a handful of idealess East Indians interested in prados and personal perks. However, Guyana would have taken a gigantic step backward by replacing an ethnic winner-take-all political system with an ethno rigger-take-all dictatorship.
Communal leader Granger, if he is sworn in under the present circumstances, is now set to entrench an ethno-rentier dictatorship – which started as an elected ethno-rentier oligarchy from around 2017. Since this time, we witnessed the emergence of a different flavour of ethno rent-seeking agencies such as the Office of the Presidency, SARU, GWI, GRA, Guyana Lands and Surveys Commission, University of Guyana and elsewhere. SARU is essentially your garden-variety shake-down organization with jobs for mainly the old, retired, privileged Afro-Guyanese males. In just the year of 2018, almost one billion dollars of expenses were unaccounted for since receipts were not submitted – a classic example of privileged ethno rent seeking.
Editor, although Mr Bharrat Jagdeo and I are an ocean apart in terms of ontology and political methodology, I would like to congratulate him for mobilizing and winning back his base, as well as for securing about 60% of the Amerindian votes and a sizable percentage (about 20%) of the mixed Guyanese votes. He demonstrated his enormous political skills and a willingness to reach out to Afro-Guyanese as indicated by the selection of Brigadier Mark Phillips as Prime Ministerial candidate.
However, Mr. Jagdeo’s political methodology is not suitable to a place like Guyana. His approach to politics would have been a resounding success in a largely homogeneous country such as South Korea or Japan. Most Afro-Guyanese are likely to say – and rightly so – that the PPP/C does not get to select their leader (s). My cursory observation of statements of poll posted on Stabroek News website indicates that Afro-Guyanese overwhelmingly prefer their own communal leader, Mr. Granger. East Indians also largely prefer their own ethnic communal leader. The third parties did not do well this time around.
Furthermore, Mr. Jagdeo buried his head in the sand when he continually failed to account for the fact that the PPP/C does not control the “disruptive arms of the State.” Once in opposition, the PPP/C cannot mount a serious destabilization strategy as the PNC demonstrated in the past. I stated this clearly last year in my column “The incentives enabled by the constitution matter” (SN: 29/09/2019). I have resigned from writing columns.
This is what I wrote last year: “A third letter, from Mr. Allan Fenty, does a wonderful job outlining President Granger’s guile in pushing the election forward (SN: 09/23/2019). PNCR supporters and shills alike are in full praise of the president. Even Mr. Fenty was impressed with the president’s strategies. Indeed, the government’s representatives on GECOM also played a substantial role in enabling the delay beyond the constitutionally mandated timeframe. The first salvo in electoral uncertainty was signalled when Mr. Granger asked the opposition leader to give him six complete choices for the Chair of GECOM. Then there was the nonsense about which profession produces fit and proper folks. The opposition leader of course did not pull the rug and played about three choices off the bat – thus setting off a series of actions that will likely make the election unfree and unfair.
“Having said that, is it just guile which allows the president to go against the very constitution of his hero, Forbes Burnham? That tinkered Burnham-Shahabuddeen constitution, which Professor Rudy James noted was built on the foundation of a one-party or dictatorial constitution of Tanzania?
“I don’t think it was guile. It was power! As a thought experiment, ask yourself whether the PPP could have delayed elections for close to one year if it had lost a no-confidence vote. As Mr. Ravi Dev said, the PNCR controls the ‘disruptive arms of the State.’ I like to think about it this way: the PNCR had a credible strategy of destabilisation when it was in opposition and the PPP/C has none. The PNC demonstrated this clearly after the 1997 general election. The protests established the conditions for the more violent outcomes after the jailbreak in February 2002. In other words, the PNCR has de facto power and the PPP/C does not. When in government the PPP/C has to hope the ‘disruptive arms of the State’ provides it with some de jure power. This fact has not yet been considered in the PPP/C’s post-2015 strategy set.”
It is time to discuss new political, electoral and governance systems as far reaching as federalism.
Yours faithfully,
Dr. Tarron Khemraj
