Governing without safeguard

May 21, 2026 Editorial, News

---

Editorial…

(Kaieteur News) – Nearly 100 days have passed since the National Assembly last convened, yet the government continues to behave as if nothing is wrong. Such political neglect, dressed up as routine governance, must be condemned for what it is: a dangerous weakening of democratic accountability.

The diplomatic community has finally found its voice. Statements are now emerging urging the reconvening of parliament, joining concerns already raised by opposition parties and sections of civil society. While these calls are welcome, they come after far too much silence over a matter that should have alarmed the country from the very beginning.

A parliament inactive for almost one hundred days is not normal in any functioning democracy.

The government, however, appears entirely unbothered. Ministers continue making announcements, policies continue unfolding and the machinery of the executive rolls on uninterrupted. Meanwhile, the constitutional body responsible for oversight, scrutiny and national debate sits idle. There are no parliamentary questions, no committee meetings, no examination of state spending and no public accountability through the nation’s highest decision-making forum.

This is precisely why parliament exists. Parliament is the core safeguard against unchecked executive authority. When it ceases to function, power stops answering. And when power no longer answers, democratic erosion begins to take root.

What is taking place in Guyana today is not dramatic enough for headlines abroad, but it should concern every citizen who values democratic governance. Democracies rarely collapse in spectacular fashion. More often, institutions are quietly weakened through delay, indifference and calculated neglect until abnormality becomes accepted as routine.

That dangerous normalisation is now unfolding before the country’s eyes.

The administration’s conduct increasingly suggests a deliberate preference for governing without parliament. A dormant parliament means fewer uncomfortable questions, less public scrutiny and reduced institutional resistance. It creates an environment where executive dominance expands while accountability contracts.

The silence of the Speaker, Manzoor Nadir, has also become impossible to ignore. While the National Assembly remains frozen, the speaker appears occupied presiding over youth debates and ceremonial activities. The irony is striking. Young people are encouraged to participate in mock parliamentary exercises while the real parliament remains effectively shut down.

One must ask whether the leadership of the assembly fully appreciates the seriousness of this moment.

Nearly one hundred days without a sitting is not a scheduling issue. It is a constitutional and political concern. Every additional week deepens the perception that parliamentary oversight is becoming optional rather than essential.

If any other major institution in Guyana ceased functioning for this length of time, the reaction would be swift and unforgiving. Imagine the judiciary suspended for three months or schools closed indefinitely without explanation. The public outcry would be deafening. Yet parliament’s prolonged silence has been met with alarming resignation.

Perhaps this reflects a broader democratic fatigue within society. Perhaps many citizens have become so accustomed to executive dominance that institutional paralysis no longer shocks them. But indifference is precisely what allows democratic standards to deteriorate.

The diplomatic community deserves credit for eventually recognising the seriousness of the matter. International partners understand that strong institutions are critical safeguards, particularly in an oil-rich state where immense wealth and power are increasingly concentrated within the executive branch. Guyana cannot credibly present itself as a modern democracy while sidelining the very institution designed to hold government accountable.

The recent diplomatic statements therefore carry significance beyond mere symbolism. They signal growing concern that Guyana’s democratic architecture is slowly being hollowed out.

The government should not dismiss those concerns lightly.

No administration, regardless of its popularity or parliamentary majority, has the right to govern indefinitely without legislative scrutiny. Elections alone do not sustain democracy. Accountability between elections is equally essential. Parliament is where that accountability is meant to occur openly and regularly.

Instead, Guyanese citizens are witnessing prolonged silence from the institution entrusted with representing their voices.

The National Assembly must be reconvened immediately. Not after political calculations are completed. Not when it becomes strategically convenient. Immediately.

---

• Editorial, governing, National Assembly, safeguard

---