LET’S HOPE ELECTIONS AND POST-ELECTION DRAMAS ARE PEACEFUL
Pre-election periods in Guyana have always been generally peaceful, except for 1992. Post-election periods have sometimes been accompanied by violence, and always by drama. In 1992, tension pervaded the atmosphere because the outcome was uncertain for a multiplicity of reasons. Free and fair elections had last been held in 1964. It was generally expected that the PNC would lose and that the PPP, either alone or in coalition with other smaller opposition parties, which had big expectations, would form the government. The election campaign itself was largely peaceful, but election day and the immediate post-election period were marked by extensive violence directed at perceived PPP supporters and at derailingthe elections process. President Carter intervened and saved the day, and the rest is history.
In 1997 Mrs. Janet Jagan was the Presidential Candidate for the PPP, Cheddi Jagan having died earlier in the year. The election campaign was peaceful. The election results gave the PPP the largest election victory up to that time and since. But no sooner were the elections over, widespread demonstrations and unrest enveloped the city and persisted for many weeks. The object of the unrest was the colour of Mrs. Jagan’s skin and it was aided by public obeah ceremonies. This involved the beating of a white doll attired in white, while intoning the words “wok ponshe,” directed to Mrs. Jagan. The violence ended with the Herdmanston Accord and St. Lucia Statement of 1998, between the PNCR and PPP, mediated by Caricom.
The pattern of widespread post-election disruption once again followed the 2001 elections with demonstrations, robberies and violence in and around Georgetown. The UN Regional Group for Latin America and the Caribbean in a report in 2006 stated: “Highly contested elections held in 2001 led to widespread violence in the Guyanese capital of Georgetown and the surrounding countryside, in a sequence of events almost identical to what had follows contests in 1997 and 1992.” A surprising turn of events took place after some weeks when PNC Leader and former President Hoyte agreed to talks with the PPP. The violence ended and extensive discussions took place between the parties over a period of months. But the process fizzled out. Hoyte later embraced shared governance, which the PPP, an early advocate, ignored. Criminal terrorism, politically inspired, was unleashed and lasted for several years.
By 2006 the PNCR had a new leader, Robert Corbin, Desmond Hoyte having passed on 22 December 2002. Much internal dissention was faced by Corbin. Raphael Trotman, a popular PNCR leader, along with Khemraj Ramjattan of the PPP and Sheila Holder of the AFC formed the Alliance for Change in 2005. There was no post-election violence in 2006, but there was another kind of post-election drama. In an historic development the PNCR lost five seats in the National Assembly,and the AFC gained five seats. For the first time, it was demonstrated that the major parties are not ethnic monoliths. As a footnote, the PPP and PNCR held discussions and came to agreements which were later abandoned. The PPP once again lost a golden opportunity to forge a lasting relationship with thePNCR.
2011 was the PPP’s turn. Confidently predicting victory, the PPP could not muster an absolute majority. Attributing its loss to poor organization, rather than economic and political disenchantment of some of its supporters, who migrated to the AFC, it unwisely opted to govern alone without coalescing with either APNU or the AFC or both, or having any kind of programmatic agreement, which would have kept the PPP in office and Donald Ramotar as president until 2021. The PPP did nothing to prevent a later alliance between APNU and the AFC, convinced that it was organizational default and not political deficit that caused its loss and, once the organizational weaknesses were remedied, it would come roaring back. The PPP’s loss in 2015 to the APNU+AFC alliance, which it sat back and allowed to happen, provide post-election dramas that were hardly ever seen in Guyana’s politics.
In 2020 Guyana’s past confronted us again with extensive violence and a determined attempt to rig the elections by APNU+AFC. The extensive violence in the Cotton Tree area of East Berbice followed the killing of the Henry cousins on the suspicion that they were politically motivated. The charges that were later brought against two persons suggested no political motives. The attempts to rig the 2020 elections, which traumatized the nation for five months, have been dealt with extensively elsewhere. The drama was painful.
The 2025 election campaign has been marked by a drama with a twist. Like in 2006 with the emergence of the AFC, the WIN has become the wild card of the campaign. Whether or not the large crowds in blue that WIN has been attracting are interested in its meetings or not, and whether or not they are paid to be there, WIN has been an unusual development in Guyana’s politics, led as it is be a sanctioned US person. Speculation is rife as to its potential. While no one envisages the possibility that WIN will win a majority, it is suggested that it may obtain from two seats to enough seats to decimate APNU while reducing the PPP to a minority. Hardly likely I think!
