ERG wants societal talks on electoral reform, not offering prescriptions
This is the third entry in a series on civil society
New NGO, Electoral Reform Group at this stage can only advocate for meaningful dialogue among Government, Opposition and civil society, apart from raising awareness in society about the need for electoral reform, says the group’s coordinator, economist Dr Desmond Thomas.
“At this stage of the Electoral Reform Group’s (ERG) operations, our main focus for electoral reform is dialogue and making people more knowledgeable about how the electoral system works, its strengths and weaknesses. We are not into the idea of making prescriptions at the moment,” Thomas said.
Since the onslaught on civil society which saw President Irfaan Ali calling from Belize while at a CARICOM Heads of Government meeting and questioning the legitimacy of civil society groups and accusing them of selective advocacy in relation to accountability and the Natural Resource Fund, and a number of his ministers following suit, Thomas said, “Government has been kind of acknowledging the need for consultations.”
Consultations were had just before the budget presentation with Minister of Parliamentary Affairs and Governance Gail Teixeira and Finance Minister Ashni Singh who met with some groups and another was held on the low carbon development strategy.
“Government seems to be acknowledging that it is important to go through some kinds of consultations. I think we can call that a victory for consultations by civil society.” ERG and another newly formed group Article 13 and Policy Forum Guyana (PFG) are among some civil society groups calling for consultations.
Even though Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo stated at a recent press conference that Government was holding consultations through outreaches in communities, meeting directly with the people and cutting out the middlemen (an apparent reference to civil society), Thomas said, “The one good thing is that these consultations are starting to show up. However, the reaction of Government is really unfortunate because it suggests that Government wants to cherry pick who civil society is.”
Government want to decide which civil society group has validity, he said. “Whether as a group or an individual, civil society has a right to speak up. It is really unfortunate that when you look on, you get the sense that Government is only happy with civil society that supports their position.”
The second aspect that is troubling, he said, goes back to the electoral system. “At the end of the day what comes out of the consultations does not matter. Government can go to Parliament and pass whatever they want because they
have a one-seat advantage. That means that consultations are nowhere as meaningful as they need to be.”
On claims that the private sector has been usurping the role of civil society, Thomas said, the Private Sector Commission (PSC) and related bodies are all bona fide civil society organisations and are not usurping the role of civil society, “They have as much right as any civil society organisation to speak up.”
Amplified
However, the PSC has an advantage, he said, “In that it has the resources. It appears to be closely aligned to the present government so their voice gets amplified by the fact that Government listens and responds to them. They are not political parties and their membership does not depend on political persuasions. On the other hand, other civil society groups like ours are struggling because we are not endowed with resources and trying to have a voice is difficult because of how our political system is set up. It is very frustrating for non-governmental bodies to function effectively.”
In recent times, he said, he senses that people and civil society groups are speaking out a bit more.
The current system, he said, fosters the polarization that Guyanese experience at elections time and which aggravates division in the society.
“It does not favour inclusiveness nor does it favour a climate of political negotiations and compromise. Instead it fosters a winner takes all political environment.”
When people talk about the problems of race politically, he said, “That is a stereotype. Even within one race there are different shades of black. There is a lot more to the ethnic discussion that needs to happen. If you look around the world we are not as badly off as some others.”
Many Guyanese feel as if nothing could be done about the problems of a divided society but, he said, “There are solutions to our problems.”
He said the politicians are mostly to be blamed for fostering the idea that the situation, the constitution, rules, electoral system, GECOM, are all things that cannot be changed. There are solutions to our problems. We are never going to find them if we depend on the politicians alone to do it. That means that different sections of the society must be at the table so that you come up with a consensual solution that everyone can live with. That is the only way.”
Positing that Guyana is diverse and not divided, he said, “Our relations as a people is congenial. The problem is a political one. We have a political system that fosters and fuels racial ethnic competition, ethnic insecurity, and suspicion. We have so many races in Guyana and it boils down to two parties. That has been a part of our history since the 1950s. The emphasis on race is lazy as far as I am concerned because people don’t dig deep.”
In all the problems Guyana has had over the past 60 or 70 years, Thomas said, “the one thing we, as society have never done is to sit down and try to talk to each other. That is partly because the major parties don’t want that because it will weaken their base and their control. They are more comfortable with a polarized environment.”
The Indigenous Peoples population is the fastest growing group in Guyana, he noted, and yet the polarized environment makes it less effective as a way of mobilising and getting them involved and influencing the direction of politics in this country. “As the Indigenous Peoples ethnic group grows it should have been growing in its influence,” he said.
On the composition of GECOM, he said, both Government and Opposition seem to be comfortable with its structure.
Noting that a change in GECOM’s structure has been prescribed for decades, he said, the three on either side is dysfunctional as they do not ever agree on major issues so decisions boil down to the chairman. Models that work, including the 11-member commission in Jamaica, he said, have worked.
Institutional weakness
“We are confident that if we can fix the electoral system aspects, then we can move on to other areas of institutional weakness. This country has institutional weakness all over.”
The idea of juxtaposing constitutional reform with electoral reform is not useful, he said but added that electoral reform is in a way constitutional reform that is targeted to a specific aspect of the constitution.
Government is making proposals for a revision/review of sections of the Representation of the People Act, he noted, but Government being a party to the outcome is a straight conflict of interest. If the country wants an electoral system that really works, the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) should be leading the reform process and not Government, he said.
At present, he said, GECOM cannot lead the process because of how it is set up. So GECOM essentially carries out Government’s decision rather than being an independent essential body that manages the electoral processes. “In an ideal setting you would expect GECOM to lead the research, consultations and then take its recommendations to the Parliament for the Parliament to debate. We don’t have that,” he said.
Asked what ERG sees is wrong with the electoral system, Thomas said, the first problem is accountability. “The members of parliament (MPs) are not directly connected to any group of people. If you have an issue in your constituency you do not
know who to go to directly. You have constituency elections but in that constituency, you elect a list. You do not elect Mr So And So. We have this recall legislation where the leader of the party, any party can have an MP eliminated or expelled from the Parliament at any time, so the loyalty of an MP in the Parliament is to the party and the leadership of the party rather than to constituents. The average Guyanese does not know this about our electoral system. They go into a booth, mark their vote and that is it. Each person is one person one vote but they do not know they are voting in two elections.”
Asked what are the solutions, he said, “ERG does not want to prescribe solutions right now. It is much more important for people to be aware that things are wrong and we get together to solve them through dialogue. As I said, one of the things that is wrong, is the recall legislation. The system does not encourage inclusiveness. It is not a system that is favourable to parties embracing different communities.”
In the 2015 elections more than 99. 5 per cent of the votes either went to APNU+AFC or the PPP/C. The political system is in a quagmire based on the rivalry between the PPP/C and the PNCR, he said. “We should have a much more active multiparty environment which is the intention behind proportional representation (PR). The PR system is supposed to favour multiparty engagement and negotiations but the way our system is set up, it does not foster that kind of engagement across different communities. We just split the country down one side or the other. That is not healthy.”
ERG was formally established in December 2020 but it came into being in May 2020 after the general and regional elections and before the elections results were declared. It is run by a core executive and has a membership that includes locals and people in the diaspora. The core group meets on a weekly basis and the wider group once a month or once every two months. It is a member of the umbrella civil society body, Policy Forum Guyana.