The AFC has noted with great interest the position being taken by GECOM as stated in a letter written by its Chairman Dr. Steve Surujbally, A.A., and the President’s remarks that his government will make “one final attempt” to resolve the outstanding issues of local government. The latter, is a clever formulation of an announcement that local government elections will once again be delayed, albeit for the reforms to be implemented.

It is well known that the reforms being demanded were mandated in the Constitution so what we in the opposition expect as we go forward, is good faith and faithfulness to the constitutional mandate. There is actually very little to negotiate and quibble about if we are to just honour and uphold the rule of law. We do agree with the President that Guyanese have grown weary and fed up of the delays. It is because of this known fact that we have a duty to deliver, through elections, a system that is healthy, energetic and complete in all its parts; one that can grow and mature independently with little government intervention and controls.     

Getting back to the issue of GECOM’s letter, it’s Chairman admits that it cannot be “unmindful of the concerns expressed by the Parliamentary Opposition Parties” and quite justifiably goes on to point out the “consequences” of delaying elections. These consequences are: the likely unavailability of trained personnel; the expiration of the validity of the Voters List; the burden of having to do new claims and objections exercise; and the high cost associated with mobilization for elections. We are strongly of the opinion that these factors, and arguments, though important, are rendered almost valueless and ineffective when one places on the other side of that scale which measures democratic success, the human and social cost of introducing a deformed local government system into an already dysfunctional society. We will have a disaster. 

The people were told that they would have a new system that would flow outwards and away from the dominating and stifling centre and as it goes, depositing the instruments of democracy and empowering people at the grass roots level. Therefore, at this time, merely to have the elections machinery in place is merely to have one half of the package in place. There has to be an enabling environment to accompany the machinery for elections to be held. Then we can successfully have the development of a healthy and sustainable local government system. The two must go hand in hand. It would appear that one piece may have arrived earlier than the second. We must wait for the other to be fitted into place as it stands to reason, that one cannot proceed without the other.      

The AFC wishes to re-state what it considers to be some fundamental truths about the holding of Local Government Elections:

1. GECOM, as an autonomous constitutional body, has a constitutional obligation to produce credible elections within an enabling democratic environment.
2. Having the machinery, personnel, and money in place are secondary factors to those considerations that say that the constitution has mandated that local government elections are held under a reformed system. GECOM Is very much a stakeholder in deciding the question of whether there are elections for the sake of it or there are elections following the implementation of reforms that truly gives the people power over their lives. We will support GECOM’s call for inclusion in the finalization process of the reform process.
3. The people have waited for 13 years for meaningful local government elections to be held and they are prepared to wait a few more months to ensure that all of the necessary and promised reforms are put in place. Indeed “anything worth having is worth waiting for”. 
4. The holding of elections, or the act of elections, in and of itself, does not constitute the presence of democracy.
5.  Any Local Government elections without the reforms would be a meaningless exercise and would only serve to legitimize the very bad governance that prevented the reforms.
6. By stalling the reforms the government has cost the nation money and denied the people representation.
7. The working class people need an opportunity to be freed of the yoke and tyranny of big government that has dictated their lives for the past decades.

  The AFC therefore welcomes the recent pronouncements of GECOM and the President and feels vindicated in its demands for all reforms to be in place before the holding of elections. We are prepared to cooperate and to work unceasingly on an established platform of mutual respect, equality and good faith, until all the promised reforms are in place.

A Note On Casino Gambling

Given the rather strange comment that the local gambling legislation is promoting  “apartheid” in Guyana, and the perception which this generated that the National Assembly passed an improper and discriminatory law, we want to provide the historical and contextual background surrounding the passage of the law:

1. The AFC and other opposition parties strenuously opposed the PPP/C’s legislation  on casino gambling because the research convinced us that despite its successes elsewhere, we should not have gambling in Guyana;

2. The President and his Ministers declared that because of their awareness and acceptance of the “corrupting influence” of  gambling that they would restrict access to casinos to non-national sand non residents alike. This is how the Bahamas model was chosen and introduced by the PPP/C government.

3. We still opposed the law and continue to do so until further advised;

4. We agree that there is something intrinsically wrong with different rights for different citizens, but we did not make this law and cannot now argue for the inclusion of all. In fact we are now being persuaded to call for the repealing of the law in its totality because of its discriminatory nature;

5. This is akin to the marijuana argument…should we allow all citizens to use marijuana, or some for health and religious purposes only. All may feel that they are entitled to its use and benefits, but public policy, as it stands now,  requires that the preservation of the public good ensures a restrictive approach;  

6. The Regulations which were to have accompanied the Act before gambling commenced have not been drafted and passed into law yet the casino is already open;  

7. We have not been approached by the government about an amendment, but take issue with the insinuation that the entire National Assembly had foisted an “apartheid” type system on Guyanese when in fact it was the PPP/C parliamentarians who introduced and passed this law against the objections of the opposition parties.

8. The PPP/C knows what it has to do if it wants to change the law and should stop trying to make it appear that the blames lies elsewhere.

Please follow and like us: