AFC’s posit of no platform now for power-sharing proved

Jan 14, 2009 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
Permit me please to respond to a letter written by Mr. Eric Phillips on behalf of ACDA as published in the Kaieteur News of 13th January, 2008. Mr. Phillips has made some fundamental and worthwhile statements regarding governance in Guyana but, unfortunately, has gone on to castigate the political parties for their “Machiavellian utterings” on the issue.
Speaking for myself and the AFC, I have to let it be known that I do not agree with his observations regarding the AFC and power-sharing. Mr. Phillips obviously formed his opinion after reading extracts of an article on the subject in the SN edition of January 4th, 2008. He is invited to publish any of my previous writings on the subject that establish a contrary view. With your indulgence, I wish to quote that part of the SN article on the subject:
“AFC leader Raphael Trotman says at the moment there is no platform for sustainable executive power-sharing, saying there is a lack of respect and trust among the political actors. What is more, he thinks that any meaningful move in this direction needs to begin with a fundamental devolution of power, starting at the community level.
“I don’t believe the climate exists for executive power sharing, short of forcing the PPP to do it, Trotman explains. He warns that if the PPP is brought to the table under duress the process would not be sustainable. The recent events in Zimbabwe illustrate the point, as a deal for a unity government signed between President Robert Mugabe’s ZANU-PF and opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai has yet to see any progress.
“According to Trotman, it is clear that there is a lack of respect among the two parties and, although the ZANU-PF signed, it has no interest in any meaningful sharing of power. So, if the climate is not right, it is not going to happen, he observes.
“Emphasising the need for a transformation in the organisation of the country’s system of governance, the AFC is advocating a bottom-up approach that begins with empowering people at the level of villages and communities. Trotman says Village Councils and Neighbourhood Democratic Councils need to be reconstituted and given new levels of autonomy, while Regional Democratic Councils need to be allowed to function with less interference from central government, including independent executive officers. He adds that there is also need for a proper constituency system to ensure a balance of greater representation with proper accountability. In this regard, he said the AFC will be pushing for change in the current party list system, in favour of one that would allow the people to directly elect representatives to the parliament to represent their constituency.”
With respect, I posit that nothing in this article points out that I, and/or the AFC, are against “power-sharing”. We locate our point of view on the subject in Article 13 of the Guyana Constitution, which mandates that an “inclusionary democracy” is established in Guyana, and reiterate that the present model and practice of governance is offensive to that mandate. All that was obviously stated by me was that the platform for sustainable power-sharing at the executive level does not exist in Guyana right now. In fact some of the tenets contained in Mr. Phillips’ outlook are shared by me and the AFC, such as the removal of the party list system, and the restoration of the constituency system.
We also agree with Mr. Phillips that the process has to be people-driven. These positions were before expressly stated in the AFC’s 2009 New Year message, when it was stated that:
“It is patently obvious that there has to be a transformation of the way in which the system of governance in Guyana is organised. This reform cannot come simply by tinkering at the top by placing a few politicians here and there, in some committees and commissions, or even in the Cabinet, or by pretending that our National Assembly is our greatest example of a proper functioning democracy. This change has to come at the most important level, that is, from the people.
“People must have freedom of choice in their villages and communities, with the accompanying right to raise and spend revenue as they see fit. This is why we in the AFC believe that simply having Local Government, and later National Elections, without fundamental changes, will keep us tied to the past. This is the kind of change that the people of Guyana have to demand and expect of their leaders.
“It is the change that lessens the influence of the few, and replaces it with the power of the multitudes.”
Mr. Phillips is entitled to his views, and we respect his right to hold them. However, we urge that the full facts be brought to the public’s attention and ventilated accordingly.
If one were to accept Mr. Phillips’ views on power-sharing it would appear that there are now three publicly known views; those of the PPP/C, PNCR, and that of the AFC. If, as he says, ACDA will be unveiling its own model shortly, then we will have a fourth.
This fact in itself drives home the point that we are nowhere near to realising the goal of sharing power in Guyana, as there are many different views on what the concept really means, and how consensus will be found for its implementation.
The AFC is on record (most recently in the aftermath of the Lusignan massacre) as calling for a national dialogue on the system of governance in Guyana, and repeats the pledge that it is ready, willing, and able to meet with any person or group, including ACDA, the PPP/C, and the PNCR to advance the imperative of constitutional reformation. If we begin by condemning all the political parties and the lawyers, then we may find that we are advocating exclusionary, rather than inclusionary, politics.
Mr. Eric Phillips, and many, many more like him, whether they be lawyers, members of established political parties, or members of civil society, have a role to play in the united, peaceful, and prosperous development of Guyana. Let us find a way to fuse our talents and views.
Raphael Trotman

---

---