The People’s Progressive Party (PPP) of Cheddi Jagan fell afoul of the West in the era of containment of communism, and the current leadership appears set to suffer a similar fate in the current küresel struggle between democracy and autocracy. The Jagans found it difficult to pivot away from communism and the present leadership is more concerned with holding power than building a functioning liberal democracy in Guyana.
The PPP government has had an abysmal record of dealing with issues having to do with democratic renewal and perhaps this helps to explain why at the first appropriate public opportunity afforded it after Vice-President and General Secretary of the PPP Mr. Bharrat Jagdeo, at Babu Jaan, threatened the political opponents of his party with dire consequence as the country proceeds to the 2025 general and regional elections, during discussion on Guyana at the 140th Session of the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC), the United States representative, Professor Laurence R. Helfer of New York, engaged in a most forceful questioning of the PPP government and it is widely believed that Guyana’s representative at that meeting was unable to sensibly respond.
Helfer raised some troublesome but fundamental issues that have to do with democratisation that confirm the formal designation of Guyana as a growing autocratic state. For example, the decades-long non-confirmation of substantive heads of the judiciary, corruption in the Guyana Police Force and the absence of investigation into allegations against the vice-president himself, the selective public procurement of contracts, harassment of journalists, the US visa revocation of a permanent secretary etc., etc.
Professor Helfer’s intervention raised the ire of Jagdeo, who according to reports claimed that Helfer’s position had been ‘contaminated’ by the opposition People’s National Congress (PNC) in and around New York, that he was not speaking on behalf of the US government that had not raised these matters with his government, and in typical autocratic style Jagdeo wants to know who complained to the UNHRC rather than outlining how his government intends to seriously address the important issues raised.
Firstly, it is true that the weak performance of Guyana representative’s in response to these specific issues does suggest that she may have been taken by surprise, and from my understanding, the committee is not intended to operate in that manner. The UNHRC is the body of eighteen independent experts nominated by their governments for a four-year term to monitor the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. All States Parties must report on the measures they have adopted relating to the rights described in the Covenant, and on the progress made in the enjoyment of civil and political liberties. Its thematic pillars in the Caribbean are increasing implementation of the human rights mechanisms, integrating human rights in sustainable development, strengthening the rule of law and accountability for human rights violations, and enhancing equality and countering discrimination.
As I understand it, under a simplified procedure, two documents are exchanged, namely a list of issues prior to reporting, drawn up by the Committee; and replies by the State that constitute the State’s report. Prior to the meeting at which the State Party’s report is to be reviewed, the Committee forwards to it a list of issues, indicating the topics relating to the implementation of the Covenant on which the Committee wishes the State Party to provide further specific information. The State Party is to submit its responses by a specified date prior to the meeting with the Committee.
Secondly, the New York identifier is a clear reference to the possible influence of Rickford Burke and the Caribbean Guyana Institute for Democracy (CGID) and is merely hype to satisfy the faithful. Professor Helfer is currently Sr. Professor of Law at Duke University and has taught, researched and lectured on a wide range of issues in international law, international human rights, international courts and tribunals, treaties and international organisations, and international law in U.S. courts.
He is Permanent Visiting Professor, Center of Excellence for International Courts, University of Copenhagen; Co-Editor-in-Chief, American Journal of International Law; Co-Director, Center for International and Comparative Law, Duke University; author, co-author or editor of six books and author or co-author of more than 100 other publications on international law, international human rights, international courts, international organizations, and international law in U.S. courts and has made more than 200 academic and professional presentations on these topics (https://view.officeapps.live.com/).
When bodies like the UN speak of persons being independent experts, it is unlike Guyana where the first stop to find such people is usually Freedom House, Congress Place and their associates. The professional standing of people such as Helfer is such that they are most unlikely to compromise it for the CGID and the PNC! Given the process outlined above, Professor Helfer could not have hoodwinked all the other members of the Committee, some of whom voiced similar concerns. Indeed, with their collective knowledge and experience, just think what their stance implies about the current regime in Guyana!
Thirdly, if these matters have not been raised by the US government before, I do not know what Jagdeo made of the humiliating trip he and the president were ‘invited’ to make Washington earlier in their regime, and all the associated lamentations before and since then of the need for greater inclusion, equitability, and creation of a functioning democracy in Guyana.
Studies have provided convincing evidence that the impressionable years are indeed important for the development of political orientation, and that there is a great deal of stability in citizens’ political identities and engagement in later life. (https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/41327/chapter/352327025). Guyana’s population is still being socialised in arguably the most complex and largely autocratic political environment in the Commonwealth Caribbean. Desmond Hoyte was the most cosmopolitan of Guyana’s presidents, yet he took years to grasp the true nature of Guyanese society and pivot away, at least conceptually, from his traditional beliefs.
For the PPP or the PNC, being in government has not and will not translate into optimal national management. Such will always be as Janet Jagan rightly perceived – doing the best you could in the context of holding power. She prioritised and was content with holding power but in this era, this will not do!