Recommended reforms 

Jul 19, 2023 Editorial

---

Kaieteur News – Following the 2020 elections, the European Union (EU) delivered a report that contained 26 recommendations from its people on the local ground, of which eight were labeled as priorities.  To its credit, the PPP/C Government moved speedily and strongly to deal with those priority recommendations that related to the counting of votes cast, and accompanying clarity in the declaration of official results.  We think that was urgently needed, and helps to remove some of farces that were part of the last elections.  On the other hand, there are those other recommendations, including priority ones that have not moved much, sometimes not at all.

Political financing is one that has not seen any material movement from the PPP/C Government, though the stream of words about wanting to do the right thing has continued unabated. Truth be told, the Opposition has not come out in the clearest, most persuasive terms about where it stands with political financing, and what it wants done to curb excesses.  With the advent of oil, and numerous downstream businesses opportunities being exploited, there is the perfect storm and perfect cover for questionable money to end up here.  Real estate developments involving gated communities and hotel construction call for hundreds of millions in financing, all of which is not necessarily clean, and which cunning politicians across the board in Guyana know.  This positions them nicely either to seek out donations, or to sit back and wait for the gifts that come to them and their party coffers.  The result could be that huge sums of suspect money influence our elections to the detriment of law, institutions, and citizens.  This is not only a threat to democracy; it undermines the will of the people.

In addition, concerns have been raised about oil companies and the probability of them being quietly involved in funding established political parties, or new groups, with the objective of pushing one or the other group towards electoral triumph, or draining away votes from a contender, so that the outcome is already predetermined.  Money makes many things possible in politics, from vote buying to compromising officials to interfering with electoral dynamics.  The beneficiaries are not Guyanese voters, but those who greased their wheels for greater freedoms with rules and regulations, higher profits under the veil of legitimate operational activity, and more government favours that continue the heavy imbalances in the national patrimony that grievously wound Guyanese.

Another priority is the role of government, as such relates to the State media.  This recommendation has fallen flat in terms of what the EU observer mission had in mind. The government has to move away from its conspicuously powerful presence in the media, or at least reduce to a minimum its intimate association with the media.  In contrast to the EU’s recommendation on what should happen with State media, the PPP/C Government, it can be said, has expanded its already broad footprint in traditional media, plus the wide-open sprawl of social media.  Several semi-State media arms are dedicated almost exclusively to propagating talking points of the PPP/C Government, to being channels for attacking conscientious citizens using their constitutional right to free speech, and to overwhelm Guyanese with the views and positions of one side only, viz., the PPP/C Government.  There is also the matter of identification of political advertisements on social media, which was one of the eight priorities recommended by the EU.

The fact that there has been considerable foot-dragging by the PPP/C Government and its crafty leadership with political financing and government essentially relinquishing significant ground in State media, does not surprise in the least.  These are areas of known strength, and there is neither haste nor even interest to clampdown on what impairs more than elections.  They impair the authenticity and quality of Guyana’s democracy.  In fairness, no political group manifests the required enthusiasm for following up on meaningful recommendations when it is in office.  Why tamper with what has been a source of proven strength, what gives a tremendous edge?  It is better to pretend to do something by nibbling around the edges, and leave the status quo largely intact.  Recommendations are nice to have, but only when they help, definitely not when they hinder.

---

• Editorial, European Union (EU), Government, opposition, PPP/C

---