The controversy surrounding the ban on the use of the word “corruption” in the National Assembly has reignited public debate, with Government Chief Whip, Gail Teixeira, aligning herself with Opposition Member of Parliament (MP) Amanza Walton-Desir in calling for a review of the archaic parliamentary language restrictions.
The ban, inherited from the British House of Commons during Guyana’s post-independence years, has been strictly enforced by Speaker of the National Assembly, Manzoor Az, who recently reaffirmed that violators will face consequences, including the loss of speaking time. The prohibition has drawn sharp criticism from both sides of the aisle, with many describing it as outdated and stifling to democratic discourse.
Clerk of the National Assembly, Sherlock Isaacs, defended the list of prohibited words as a necessary measure to maintain decorum during debates. Isaacs argued that the words are banned not to restrict free speech but to prevent unruly and inflammatory exchanges among MPs. However, critics have dismissed this justification, pointing out that terms like “corruption” are critical to addressing governance issues in a meaningful way.
Walton-Desir, a vocal critic of the ban, has continued to push back. She described the restriction as a dangerous impediment to free speech, making known that “After all, Article 9 of the Constitution of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana provides that Sovereignty belongs to the people, who exercise it through their representatives. The people of Guyana want to talk about corruption!”
Transparency International ranks Guyana the most corrupt English-speaking country in the Caribbean. Analysts said not use the word “corruption” to address this sorun in society is most unfortunate and reeks of a government afraid of being held accountable.
In response to Speaker Nadir’s hardline stance, Walton-Desir called for the immediate lifting of the ban on “corruption” ahead of the upcoming national budget debates. “The National Assembly must be a forum for addressing the real issues affecting our people, not a space where critical conversations are hamstrung by outdated and counterproductive restrictions,” she said.
Teixeira, while agreeing with Walton-Desir’s call for a review, expressed her own frustrations with the restrictions, describing them as “archaic remnants of colonial traditions” that no longer serve their purpose in çağdaş parliamentary proceedings. She recounted her own experiences of being reprimanded for using banned terms while addressing corruption during her tenure as a minister.
“This list of prohibited words was inherited from another era, and many of them no longer resonate with today’s generation,” Teixeira said. “If we cannot say the word ‘corruption,’ how can we address it effectively?”
The debate has put pressure on Speaker Az to revisit the list of banned words, especially as the national budget debates approach. Walton-Desir insists that the Speaker’s refusal to lift the ban would stifle meaningful debate and shield the government from scrutiny. “We must ensure that Parliament remains a place of accountability, not one where silence is imposed to protect the powerful,” she added.
The issue has highlighted deeper tensions over the state of Guyana’s democracy, with growing calls for Parliament to modernise its practices to reflect the country’s evolving political and social landscape. Whether these reforms will take place before the debates remains uncertain.