FROM WHERE I STAND: Civil society is comatose and Guyana demands its resuscitation

Oct 12, 2025 Features / Columnists, News

---

By Janelle A.N. Persaud

(Kaieteur News) – Civil society in Guyana isn’t dead. But it is comatose; surviving on shallow pulses of engagement, periodic consultation, and the heroic labour of a few relentless individuals. It twitches from time to time, when prompted by government-led consultations or donor timelines. However, a country this alive, with this level of transformation, wealth, and complexity, cannot afford a civil society that merely twitches. It demands resuscitation.

There are countries that move forward without civil society. But the price is almost always steep: corruption, unchecked power, widening inequality, eroded trust. And when the government is as powerful and as intolerant of dissent as ours seems to be, civil society’s dormancy becomes incredibly dangerous.

Of course, there are consultations, especially when required; like for the national budget, the Low Carbon Development Strategy, and notably the UN Universal Periodic Review (UPR). Great! But this is often checkbox inclusion. A telling example is the government’s UPR consultation on human rights, held in November 2024. According to the media coverage, only 13 civil society organisations attended out of more than 40 invited. That turnout alone reflects either civil society’s disengagement or distrust of the process. Likely both.

We also see this dynamic with legislative processes. Groups are called in after decisions have already been made or when international partners require proof of inclusion. But if civil society only gets a seat at the table when protocol demands it then that’s basically a PR stunt.

Take for instance in times of deep social distress; a femicide crisis, rising youth crime, suicide, one would expect churches and other religious institutions to be more vocal. Their silence on national issues, despite their influence, is both baffling and concerning. Where is the moral leadership? Where is the solidarity with those suffering or marginalised? Where is the role of the faith community in national healing and truth-telling?

We must also ask: why don’t more people enter the civil society space? Why is it always the same five names from the same organisations all year around? It’s a rhetorical question, we all know the answer yet few of us will admit it publicly. It starts with the fact that speaking out in Guyana carries risk; being labeled opposition and anti-development, being locked out of the process or denied opportunity, or indeed targeted by a weaponized tax system. Some might be inclined to deny this but whether true or not, the perception is real and perception is enough to silence a population.

And even when people do show up, their voices can sometimes be ignored. If you’ve spent years engaging with policymakers only to watch your contributions discarded or co-opted, why continue? Why invest energy into a process that feels performative?

Yet this isn’t just about the government. There are real questions for civil society itself. Consider the Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA), for as long as I’ve been a journalist (since 2003), it has been led by one individual. This is clearly a failure of institutional design. Even in NGOs leadership renewal, succession planning, and intergenerational inclusion are essential for longevity and legitimacy. A movement that cannot reproduce itself will inevitably fade.

The funding crisis has also become an issue. With the end of large USAID programmes, for instance, many NGOs have shuttered or scaled down, leaving civil society thinner, with fewer resources and less muscle to organize around broader national issues.

Worse still, civil society itself has grown fragmented. Labour movements protest alone. Women’s groups hold vigils alone. Human rights advocates stand alone. Rarely do we see cross-sector solidarity. It seems like every group for itself. We must know that such siloed instinct undermines power. When only a handful of people protest, it’s easy for leaders to dismiss them as rabble-rousers. There is no incentive to respond.

It’s also important to remember that civil society’s role is not limited to protest or critique. At its best, it functions as both a partner and a watchdog, helping to design solutions, support implementation, and bridge the gap between citizens and power. Unfortunately, in Guyana, advocacy is too often mistaken for antagonism. That defensiveness weakens democracy and erodes trust.

To be fair, some civil society actors have not helped their own cause, appearing only when it suits partisan lines. And the government too must stop treating every critique as a political attack. Genuine partnership demands maturity and a willingness to hear uncomfortable truths without requiring the critic to first praise the state for its efforts.

Additionally, the culture of selective engagement is made worse by the state’s resistance to transparency.

Just last July, civil society activists protested in front of the Office of the President over the failure of the Commissioner of Information to respond to freedom of information requests (Kaieteur News, July 12, 2025; Stabroek News, July 5, 2025). And let us not forget, the national census was completed in 2022. It is now 2025. Still, the full results have not been made public.

If data is locked away, if government ministries don’t share even basic non-proprietary information, how can researchers, advocates, and watchdogs do their work? You cannot hold power accountable with blindfolds on.

Perhaps the one part of civil society with real influence is the private sector. They certainly have been the most active.  For obvious reasons, they are economic drivers and maybe even campaign donors. However, I’m sure we are aware that civil society cannot be reduced to business interests alone. Civic life is broader than commerce.

This is not a call to vilify the state, certainly shouldn’t be interpreted as such. It is more a call for a new social contract, where government enables, not controls; where civil society renews itself, not just recycles leadership; and where collaboration is structured, not performative.

Our National Development Strategy of 1996 was shaped heavily by civil society input. And so, as the country embarks on its new development journey, now turbocharged by oil, a similar posture is needed. Not just for optics, for ownership – ‘Guyana is ALL ah we own’.

Across the world, from Brazil to South Africa to India, strong civil society movements have kept democracy alive, corrected policy missteps, and shaped national futures. Guyana is no different.

If we want inclusive development, we need a robust civil society.

From where I stand, resuscitating civil society is not optional. It’s the CPR Guyana needs to thrive.

About the author: Janelle A.N. Persaud is a journalist and communications strategist with over two decades of experience across media, public affairs, and development. She holds a Bachelor of Science in International Relations and a Master of Science in Strategic Development Studies from the University of Guyana.

---

• civil society, comatose, Janelle Persaud, resuscitation

---