The PPP has started the intimidation

Mar 28, 2025 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Peeping Tom…

Kaieteur News- In politics, as in life, what goes around comes around. The People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPPC) may presently revel in the loud and rowdy protests that follow Azruddin Mohamed into its strongholds.

But history teaches us that the whip you crack today may one day be turned against you. The deployment of intimidatory tactics against Mohamed is not simply a moment of partisan mischief; it is the setting of a dangerous precedent, one that may well turn against the PPPC in ways it does not yet anticipate.

Guyana is no stranger to political turbulence. The road to power has long been paved with acrimony, hostility, and, at times, outright violence. The PPPC, which now enjoys the comforts of incumbency, ought to remember that the tactics it condones today may be visited upon it tomorrow. If the intention behind these protests is to deter Mohamed from entering the political fray, it is as futile as it is shortsighted. Political history abounds with figures who have drawn strength from adversity; the more one is attacked, the more one is noticed, and in politics visibility is currency.

The PPPC has a history of decrying political intimidation when it is on the receiving end, but it appears less troubled when the shoe is on the other foot. It has felt the sting of hostile crowds before. In the 2015 and 2020 election campaigns, its meetings in PNCR strongholds were met with hecklers, jeers, and missiles. At one meeting, a party flag was urinated upon and set alight. These were not mere expressions of political disagreement; they were calculated efforts to silence and discourage. The PPPC condemned these acts, as it should have. It should now consider whether its current approach is any less destructive.

Politics is a strange game. The strategies that seem clever in one moment can become liabilities in the next. The PPPC is seeking to expand its reach into opposition strongholds, hoping to attract votes from traditional PNCR supporters. But the very actions it now sanctions against Mohamed may return to haunt it when its own election caravan rolls into opposition territory. The logic is simple: if one side sees intimidation as fair play, the other side will soon adopt the same position. What begins as an isolated tactic can quickly spiral into a norm, and a dangerous one at that.

More troubling than the protests themselves is the suggestion that they may be orchestrated by the ruling party. If true, this marks a sharp and troubling departure from democratic principles. Campaigning should be a contest of ideas, not a test of endurance against orchestrated mobs. Mohamed, regardless of whether he ultimately contests the elections, has the right to engage with the public without being shouted down or harassed. To deny him that right is to deny the essence of democratic competition.

The PPPC and its acolytes may currently view these disruptions as a form of political theater, a show of strength that demoralizes potential challengers. But in politics, intimidation does not merely silence; it also galvanizes. Supporters of Mohamed may see these actions not as deterrents but as provocations, as evidence that the ruling party fears his potential candidacy. Worse still, opposition forces may adopt similar methods, leading to a cycle of hostility that makes political discourse impossible. A party that claims to champion democracy must be wary of the forces it unleashes.

Guyana has had its share of turbulent elections. The nation cannot afford another cycle of political violence and intimidation. The responsibility of ensuring a peaceful campaign season rests with all political actors, but the burden falls heaviest on those who hold power. The PPPC, as the governing party, must take the lead in ensuring that democratic norms are upheld. It must resist the temptation to use its supporters as a bludgeon against potential opponents. To do otherwise is to risk normalizing chaos.

The international community is watching. Observer groups, embassies, and regional partners are already attuned to the fragility of Guyana’s political scene. If the PPPC continues down this path, it risks drawing the scrutiny and condemnation of those who expect democratic fairness. More immediately, it risks alienating the very voters it hopes to attract. No one is persuaded by a party that seems to fear competition. If the PPPC believes in its vision, it should welcome challengers, not attempt to silence them.

It is not too late to change course. There is still time for observer groups to engage political parties and potential candidates in discussions about fair campaigning. Agreements can be brokered to ensure that all parties are free to canvas support without fear of disruption.

Political leaders must commit to a campaign free of intimidation and violence. The PPPC, in particular, must recognize that democracy is not strengthened by silencing voices but by engaging them.

In the final analysis, the tactics being deployed against Azruddin Mohamed are not just about one man; they are about the broader trajectory of Guyanese politics. If intimidation is allowed to stand unchallenged, it will shape the conduct of this year’s and future elections. If, however, political actors choose to rise above it, they will set a precedent that strengthens democracy. The choice is clear: a politics of fear or a politics of competition. The PPPC must decide which legacy it prefers.

( The PPP has started the intimidation)

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)        

 

---

---