Guyana: always the mundane, never the magical

May 06, 2018 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

---

I was born into a political environment that was anti-colonial, pro-Third World, heavily left-wing in ideological orientation, assertive in Black pride. Those instincts have never left me, though I would say I have philosophically matured and I am not as pro-Third World as when I was a university freshman.
I do believe the Third World occupies an unfair position in the global economy and big powers cruelly exploit them. A good example would be coconut oil. We grew up hearing about the health benefit of olive oil and nothing about coconut oil. But the latter is an even better product. The Third World has far more beneficial fruit juices, but the dominant countries of the world emphasize apple, blackberry, blueberry, cranberry juices as health products.
In those ways, the Third World loses out. But the Third World has atrophied since the abolition of colonialism. Its society and leadership have become morally, culturally and philosophically bankrupt, though I believe India is an enduring exception.
The Third World fought for Independence, got it, and thereafter became a boiling cauldron of stagnancy. There is no transformational social movement, no heroic government, no breath-taking scientific research, no great, exceptional leader (counting out Mandela) since Independence. The Third World is not a place where freedoms are constantly being purified. The Arab Spring froze to death in the winter of violent mediocrity.
So here we are in 2018 with a dramatic reversion on the world stage – the US has an untrustworthy president with dangerous traits. But even Donald Trump embodies a psychology that is likely to cause him to do something iconoclastically positive. But there is no such personality in the non-white world. The non-white world is saddled with mundane leaders who show no sign of being even vaguely transformative. In my country Guyana, the lack of ideas is simply disastrous and the chasm is very, very close.
You look at the social and moral landscape of Guyana, and rut canopies the entire territory. The picture reminds me in the West Indies of running groundsmen, tarpaulin in hand, covering the cricket ground when the rains come. Every day, an opportunity to break with a stale past is wasted. It is as if a destructive tsunami has sunk the power to think in the collective leadership of this country.
When the British ruled their colonies, legislation throughout the Commonwealth was patterned after English Bills. The law establishing the Ombudsman was the same in most ex-colonies. Do you know New Zealand broke with tradition and appointed an Ombudsman that was not a former judge? Do you think here in Guyana our leaders have the ideational courage to do a similar act? Commonsense can tell you that an Ombudsman who was not formally trained in law can seek legal advice.
Do you know that the Cabinet has completed the amendment to the Marriage Act? It is now awaiting its place on the Order Paper of the House. The change abolishes the two-week residency period for a foreigner to get married in Guyana. And guess who made that announcement? President Granger when he addressed Parliament in October 2016. There were loud cheers that greeted the following words of the President; “Your Government will amend the Marriage Act.”
This same government didn’t find the time to amend the 1933 obsolete Divorce Act. This same government is refusing to approve changes to the anti-narcotics law in relation to harsh penalties for small amounts of ganja, even though the completed amendment was on the Order Paper way back in 2016 in the name of MP, Michael Carrington. This same government did find the time to amend the Legal Practitioners Act which is an insult to a 21st century mind.
Months ago the committee arising from the Act was installed. All the members are from the legal profession. The committee is to hear complaints against members of the Bar and to recommend disciplinary measures. Why would any human in the 21st century not see that the legislation is outdated? Why should society accept a committee consisting only of lawyers to discipline lawyers? What is wrong in having a non-legal person on the committee? The answer is everything is right about having such a person.
The vacant head of the Police Complaints Authority is to be appointed shortly. All the short-listed names are former judges. What is essentially wrong with having an experienced university professor in a discipline unrelated to law like sociology, journalism, international relations, or a longstanding administrator in public management? Why only a legal mind can comprehend situations where police ranks have misbehaved? How do you compare Trump with Guyana’s present leaders? Who is a more change-maker?

---

---