Set up Interim Power Sharing Government instead of going to General

Elections now
By Dr. David Hinds

September 9, 2014
I ended my last letter to the press by suggesting that another election fight under the same rules may
not be best thing for Guyana at this time and that another way is more sensible. I wish to elaborate. But
let me make two things very clear. First, I fully support the no-confidence motion. Second, I regard
constitutional reform aimed at institutionalizing winner-does-not-take all or power sharing as a
prerequisite for forward movement. (I never liked the term Shared governance, as you can share
governance without sharing power). Like those who promote elections now, I would like to see the back
of the PPP government. They have been worse than any previous post- colonial government. And I say
this as someone who risked limb, liberty and life to remove the PNC government.
But to go to another election under the current rules is to repeat an old errorgroping in the dark. After
five rounds of delusion since 1992, arising from all kinds of silly assumptions, it should be clear that our
entrenched ethnic voting pattern will not be easily overturned. In 2011, we got as far as we could get in
the circumstances. The present electoral and governance systems reward one-party and ethnic
domination and have to be discontinued if we are to move forward as a joint nation.
I am aware that nothing is impossible in social and political motion, but it would be a stretch to think
that either the PNC, APNU or the AFC could win the plurality of the vote needed to assume the
presidency. While a pre-election AFC-APNU or PNC coalition is tempting, it would be tactically foolish at
this point. The AFC has done little or nothing to liberate the Indian Guyanese electorate from the fear of
the PNC. That party may argue, with some justification that it would have been suicidal to attempt to do
so. But even with Moses Nagamootoo at the helm and in the face of some Indian Guyanese discontent
with the PPP, the AFC would be hard-pressed to muster enough Indian Guyanese votes to allow the
APNUs or PNCs presidential candidate to win a plurality. One can expect that that possibility would be
one of the PPPs trump card on the campaign trail.
So where does that leave us? Constitutional reform aimed at a political solution before the election is a
long shot, but it has to be the way forward in the short to medium term. The PPP has signaled that that
is not a consideration at this point. That party wants to regain the parliamentary majority it lost in 2011
even as it is unsure about such an eventuality. That is why they are hesitant about new elections. And
my sense is that the APNU is also hesitant. The AFC may think it has nothing to lose from new elections
and as such seems the most enthusiastic about the prospects of new elections. But I think that that
party needs to look at the big picture and is capable of doing the proper thing.
I think we are approaching a delicate moment that if handled properly could give us yet another chance
to push for a political solution. Since no party negotiates itself out of power, any solution must include
reassurances to the PPP. Since the APNU and the AFC have parliamentary power, they would also have
to be reassured. It is against this background that I propose that instead of going to elections after the
no-confidence vote, the parties should agree to set up an Interim All-Party Government. It may be
better to set up such a government before the no-confidence vote. The PPP should retain the
Presidency, but the Cabinet should be proportional. (I would have no problem with the PPP even having
a slight majority in cabinet). The present constitution allows for the setting up of such a government.
This interim government should be charged with facilitating and implementing constitutional reform of
the electoral system, the governance system and the executive and legislative branches. I think this is a
patriotic approach that puts Guyana first. Working in the Interim government would allow the parties
the experience of working together on matters such as the budget, the Anti-Money Laundering
legislation, Local Government Elections and other outstanding issues. In fact the government should be
mandated to address these outstanding issues.
Let me say in closing that this suggestion is not new. In 1990 and 1999 the WPA proposed such a
formulae. When it became clear that the 1990 election could not be held by the constitutionally
mandated date the WPA proposed an Interim Government to run the country until the electoral reforms
were completed. The then president, Desmond Hoyte, supported the proposal, but the PPP did not.
Again, when the Herdmonston Accord cut the PPPs term by two years after the 1997 election, the WPA
proposed reinstating the two years and have an Interim Government serve during that government.
Both major parties rejected the proposal. Now, we have another chance to do something reasonable.
Dr. David Hinds, a political activist and commentator, is an Associate Professor of Caribbean and
African Diaspora Studies at Arizona State University. More of his writings can be found on his website
www.guyanacaribbeanpolitics.com