The jaguar, the ballot, and the Constitution

Jun 27, 2025 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Kaieteur News – By now, the country is caught in a full-blown existential crisis: a political party has apparently dared to adopt the jaguar as its symbol. The horror! The scandal! The… wait, is that even illegal?

This little uproar, which feels like a cross between a courtroom drama and a wildlife documentary, has led some to clutch their constitutional pearls. So let’s take a deep breath and examine whether our fanged feline friend—the majestic jaguar—is actually off-limits as a political symbol.

Spoiler: it’s not.

Let’s start with the basics: What exactly are the national symbols of Guyana?

According to the Constitution, those sacred emblems include The Golden Arrowhead (our flag), The Coat of Arms (which has a jaguar on it—more on that later), The National Anthem and The National Pledge.

Nowhere—let me repeat this for the folks flipping through the Constitution like it’s the Dead Sea Scrolls—is “jaguar” mentioned as a national symbol. The jaguar is the national animal, yes, but there’s a big difference between being the national animal and being an official national symbol. After all, the national bird is the Canje Pheasant, but no one’s stopping that from starring in wildlife commercials. Symbols are codified in Article 4 to 6A of the Constitution. If it’s not there, it’s not a national symbol. Period.

A national symbol is an officially designated emblem—like a flag, anthem, coat of arms, or pledge—that represents the identity, sovereignty, and values of a nation and is recognized in law, such as in the Constitution. A national animal, on the other hand, is a chosen creature that embodies certain characteristics admired by the country (like strength or resilience) but does not carry the same legal or ceremonial weight, nor is it necessarily protected from public or political use in the same way as official national symbols.
“But,” you say, “the jaguar appears on the Coat of Arms!” Well, yes, so does a pickaxe and some feathers. Do we then ban these also as party symbols?

Let’s put this in perspective. Imagine declaring the Mona Lisa a national symbol of France and then banning any political party from using a mysterious smile as its logo. Or declaring pasta a national treasure and prohibiting Italian parties from campaigning with spaghetti-themed ads. It’s not just absurd—it’s deliciously absurd.

The Representation of the People Act, which governs how elections are run, makes no mention—none, zero, zilch—of national symbols being forbidden as party emblems. Section 16, where party symbols come up, merely says that the Elections Commission (GECOM) must approve any symbol used on the ballot paper. And that’s it. No red lights. No roaring sirens when someone chooses a coconut, cutlass, or cat (wild or otherwise).

This is the point where our jaguar drama loses its teeth. There is no lawful prohibition—none—against using a national symbol (even if, hypothetically, the jaguar was one) as a party symbol. What matters is GECOM’s discretion. It’s up to them to say, “Yes, you may have this icon grace the ballot” or “No, try again—how about a cassava?”

You see, parties can campaign with one symbol and appear on the ballot with another. The only binding concern is what symbol GECOM approves for the purpose of the ballot. So yes, a party can tattoo a jaguar on their foreheads but whether that jaguar makes it onto the ballot is GECOM’s call.

And this is where the moral panic turns mildly comedic. Some seem to think that using a national symbol confers divine authority, as though the mere presence of a jaguar on a placard will hypnotize voters into surrender. Trust me, if animals on emblems were so persuasive, we’d all be voting for Rice Krispies cereal.

But there’s a larger, philosophical issue here: Are we confusing reverence with restriction?

The Constitution, in Article 7, says we must treat national symbols with “due and proper solemnity.” That’s beautiful. It’s the literary equivalent of ironing your pants before a wedding. But solemnity doesn’t mean banning their use. If it did, we’d have to fine every school child for singing the anthem off-key. Or imprison soccer fans for waving the flag with enthusiasm bordering on disorderly conduct. So let’s calm down.

The jaguar is not a national symbol. And even if it were, its use as a party symbol is not prohibited by law. What is required is GECOM’s approval for it to appear on the ballot. That’s it. That’s the law. The rest is interpretive dance. Perhaps we should be less concerned about what animals appear on ballots and more concerned about the ones behaving like animals after elections. Until then, let the jaguar run—if not through the jungle, at least through the voting booth.

And remember, symbols don’t vote. People do.

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

---

• Azuruddin Mohamed, Guyana Elections 2025, Jaguar, Peeping Tom, The Golden Arrowhead, win

---