Mrs. Jagan was no obstacle to national unity

Apr 08, 2009 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

The President of Guyana is absolutely correct when he said that Mrs. Janet Jagan was not a hindrance to national unity. The greatest obstacle to national unity was not Mrs. Janet Jagan; it is President Jagdeo.
The press conference that the PPP called last Saturday was unnecessary. There was nothing that Mr. Corbin said in his address at the funeral of the former President that could have been construed as implying that Mrs. Jagan was a hindrance to national unity and now that she is gone that process should be revisited.
At Babu John, the President went into immediate defensive mode in reacting to what Mr. Corbin said at the parliament during the funeral of Mrs. Janet Jagan. And days later he did the same thing in response to the AFC’s appeal for involvement in Guyana’s participation in the Summit of the Americas.
The problem therefore is with Mr. Jagdeo and not with Mrs. Jagan.
Throughout her political career, Mrs. Janet Jagan was made a political scapegoat. She was blamed for a great many things that had nothing to do with her.  But because she was a woman and more especially because she was White, she became the object of unwarranted hatred.
The record would show that the greatest gains which were made in the quest for national unity were done while she was in active politics. The greatest obstacles towards national unity occurred while she was no longer part of the government but rather a mere figurehead in her party.
Mrs. Jagan led the fight for national unity in this country and the party that she co–founded united Guyanese as never before.
Guyana never again attained the degree of unity that was achieved in the run-up to the elections of 1953; and Mrs. Jagan it must be recalled played a pivotal role in that process to the point where the PPP even allowed Forbes Burnham upon his return to Guyana, to assume the Chairmanship of the PPP even though they had an able and capable Chairman in Ashton Chase.
When her husband signed away his political future by giving to Duncan Sandy the right to determine the country’s electoral system, she supported him, because both of them felt that their own personal political survival was secondary to the achievement of political independence.
Onto this day there are persons who were with Cheddi at that conference who did not agree with what he did, but he did it because he did not wish to leave that conference without a firm commitment for independence. And his wife felt the same way.
The President can today boast about Guyana having the most inclusive constitution in the Caribbean. What he forgot to mention was that these changes came about because of the political compromise that was agreed to by Mrs. Janet Jagan when she signed the Herdmanston Accord with Desmond Hoyte.
It was this process that led to the reform process and which resulted in all the progress that the President likes to mention.
Yet if he examines his own record, he will find a less than impressive record of political cooperation. His record is one of failure.
When Desmond Hoyte laid his cards on the table, there was only one measure that was contentious; all the others could have been agreed and implemented immediately.
Years later, the PNCR was still complaining about the failure to implement the recommendations that came out of the political dialogue between Hoyte and President Jagdeo.
When Robert Corbin assumed the leadership of the PNCR he decided that he would give the President a chance and so he opted for a process of constructive dialogue.
His experience was no less frustrating.
After the Lusignan massacre, the government convened a national stakeholders’ forum. Among the agreements that was reached were the following:
1. That as a matter of urgency, a new Parliamentary Standing Sectoral Committee on national security with Ministerial representation be established
2. To expedite the appointments of the six (6) Constitutional Commissions within 90 days. These are key features of the governance framework
3. To convene and activate the Parliamentary Constitutional Reform Committee to address current issues before it and to examine further areas for Constitutional reform
4. To ensure the meaningful and effective participation of civil society in these Parliamentary processes.
5. To explore an agreed mechanism for the continuation of the National Stakeholders’ Forum.
We all know of the foot-dragging that visited the implementation of these recommendations.
And to add insult to injury, when the President was asked at last Saturday’s press conference about the failure to continue the National Stakeholders’ Forum, his excuse was that it was never intended to replace political cooperation in the parliament.
Sure it was never intended to do so. It could not be intended to do so since there was an agreement for it to continue.
Most of the stakeholders are not represented in the National Assembly. Here was a mechanism which the government found necessary to activate so as to calm tension and create social cohesion following the Lusignan massacre.
That need is no longer there and the government has no interest in continuing the forum.
This is the post-1997 record of political cooperation in Guyana. It is a self–serving record on the part of the administration.
The opposition and civil society should wake up to the reality that under President Jagdeo, meaningful political cooperation is as dead as a doornail.  They should realize that such political cooperation will never materialize under the Jagdeo administration.

---

---