Article 13 and what it means to the “new” Guyanese

Mar 29, 2015 News

---

By Zena Henry
Sporadically, Article 13 of Guyana’s Constitution has been used to remind citizens of their role in the political system. More recently, with two political parties coming together, this part of the law seems to be gaining prominence – especially when the issue of national development and the citizens’ role come up.

While elders say a unified State was a direction sought after but not achieved by both the nation’s most influential political leaders, it seems to be the returning mantra in what some say could be the most important election in the country’s history.
For a modern Guyana that readily enjoys a state of sustained development, many activists, philanthropists, business persons, citizens and even politicians have pointed to a politically and racially unified nation. And many have recognized Article 13.
Article 13 of the Constitution of Guyana states that: “The principal objective of the political system of the state is to establish an inclusionary democracy by providing increasing opportunities for the participation of citizens, and their organizations in the management and decision making processes of the State, with particular emphasis on those areas of decision making that directly affect their wellbeing.”
This means that citizens are just as important as politicians or government when it comes to decision making. In some cases they are the most important, since they are the ones directly affected and finance projects or repay State loans.
When citizens’ input is limited in the country’s developmental plans, there can sometimes be confusion and mayhem, especially when the decision seems to benefit a few, a clan or a group. But, more importantly, the actions of government can then become questionable. Political commentators and observers say that a “rogue” government can then emerge. Rampant corruption, breakdown of State institutions and disrespect for the rule of law then become traits in a system where citizens do not know their role or rights, lack any say in critical matters and are not allowed oversight.
It was merely history being repeated when businessman, philanthropist and former parliamentarian Stanley Ming, reminded of the old war and political tactic of “divide and rule”.  In a special presentation held at the New Thriving Restaurant recently, Ming reflected on what he believes is a “deliberate act in Guyana to keep citizens uneducated and unaware of issues, so that they cannot make informed decisions.”
And in a multi-ethnic society like Guyana, where the legacy has been to keep the groups separated to maintain power, ignorance is a weapon in their political armory. Unaware of events and political happenings; whatever information the mind is fed – particularly by those in trustworthy positions – it becomes the “unconfirmed truth”.
This then leaves room for a greater manifestation of the “divide and rule” concept. With the acceptance of an uninformed support group, measures and policies are then reapplied to fit the agenda. Over time, citizens ‘feel the squeeze’ and society breaks down.
Article 13, some commentators say, can be the lifeline to Guyana’s problems, but citizens need to “get with the programme” to undo the damage which Ming opines is the fault of past generations.
The businessman has recently invested in putting together a seemingly attainable 15-year development plan for Guyana which has been endorsed by some local politicians and international bodies presented with the idea.
But according to Ming, specifically the nation’s youth will have to see the new Guyana come on board come May 11. He has also hinted to the new Guyanese citizen taking control and responsibility for their future; demanding transparency and accountability, and most importantly, demanding to be engaged. According to Ming, the new citizen is pertinent to the modern Guyana that will be overseen by a government under the control and eagle-eye of the citizen.
The internalization and enactment of Article 13 by citizens will see the widening of an integrated people that will be engaged in conversation, because the State will be obligated to find out what the people want before they act. Governments must ask Guyanese, “what do you want?”
Ming’s vision materialized when two years ago his children said to him that Guyana might not be a viable option in their future. According to Ming, this statement motivated him and brought him to tears, because he then understood that he and those of his era had essentially “failed the young people.”
He told the gathering that he now believes that he was not doing enough, because he failed to stand up for what was right. “Politicians have been doing many wrong things in the country. Many of us did not say anything; we did not want to rock the boat. That’s why we are today, where we are.  We stuck our heads in the sand and when we should have stood and said what was right and wrong, we didn’t.”
“It is time for this generation to right the wrongs and stand up for truth and right, or Guyana will soon be a living disaster. The option we all have is the ballot box and traditionally we have been divided by two major political parties for their own personal benefit. Guyana is young and we (citizens) hold the trump card.”
Ming’s vision for Guyana proposes that within those 15 years, the nation can be physically reconstructed to match some leading nations; institutions and services improved, significant investments in various sectors and an educated people enjoying sustained development. His findings came from various studies done on Guyana years ago by various foreign agencies and even by former colonial rulers, but was failed to be presented to citizens.
He emphasized, however, that this change is impossible without the demands and scrutiny of the people, especially if a winner-takes-all political system is to remain in Guyana.
The recently established Guyana National Civil Society Council (GNCSC) has for some time been pushing for the widespread acceptance and incorporation of Article 13 in daily society. They have based the existence of their civil society organization on the law that empowers the people.
However this institution like the Guyana National Youth Council (GNYC) which seeks to educate and encourage young people to vote, have both come under attack by the current Administration. The verbal attacks and attempts by the government to disrupt the work of these bodies are efforts some say, to deliberately limit or restrict citizens’ knowledge of rights and power.
Whatever decision citizens make on May 11 will obviously have its effects, whether positive or negative, but one thing is clear, political observers say, it will be their job to keep their leaders in line if this multi-racial economy is to join the train of sustained and continuous development.

---

---