The authoritarian danger

The PNC demonstrated its authoritarian bent for twenty-eight long years after it assumed power in 1964 in coalition with the United Force. This authoritarian turn was not responsive to any threat either internally or externally, but was derived from its Founder Leader Forbes Burnham’s Machiavellian conception of power. However, he opportunistically used the 1966 Venezuelan invasion and occupation of Ankoko Island against the background of its border controversy as a pretext for creating one of the largest armed forces in the world on a per capita basis to pre-empt any domestic challenge to his upcoming grab for power.
Burnham’s rigging of elections in 1968 made his coalition partner redundant, and his 1980 constitution merely gave a “legal” imprimatur to his supreme powers after his “Declaration of Sophia” had bestowed “paramountcy” of the PNC over the government. That paramountcy was extended over the state when the PNC flew its party flag over the Court of Appeals, then the apex court in our judicial system – the only bulwark against the Executive President that routinely rigged elections to control the legislature via every increasing “majorities”.
Today, Guyana has reached a conjuncture that eerily echoes the situation in 1968, which marked the inflection point towards authoritarianism. In its five years of coalition governance, the PNC-as-APNU showed scant regard for its AFC coalition partner that had given it the numbers to seize the reins of government. However, unlike the UF that had resigned in disgust at the PNC’s high- handed actions in general over their four years in office, and in particular its preparations for rigging the 1968 elections, the AFC has remained loyal to the PNC, even after the blatant fraud perpetrated on the Reg 4 tabulation of SOPs.
Analogous to the Venezuelan threat of the 1960s, Guyana is now confronted with an even greater threat presented by the COVID-19 pandemic, and there exists a clear and present danger that the PNC-as-APNU, which still heads the Caretaker Government, will use it as a pretext for returning to its authoritarian roots to maintain power.
It has already defied the entire foreign community for a month in refusing to allow a free and fair count of the votes. Caretaker President Granger does not fool anyone in his assertion that he is merely complying with the law, even as he allows one of his candidates to challenge the decision of GECOM to order a recount.
He has just declared a month-long countrywide lockdown and a curfew between 6pm and 6am with only specified activities permitted, where more than five persons can gather for “essential services”. Significantly, the media were not classified as an essential service, and while early enquiries have suggested it might have been an “oversight”, it should not escape notice that in other authoritarian states, such as China, Egypt, Algeria etc, the media have already been severely curtailed in their activities.
This is par for the course for authoritarian governments which view the free flow of information as their greatest threat. In its first iteration, the PNC had monopolised radio and TV broadcasting, and had severely curtailed the press so that it was almost vestigial. In terms of the build-up of the armed forces, the PNC-as-APNU had already made this a priority, and allocated billions towards that end even as spending on agriculture was slashed radically.
It is certain that protests against the Government will be curtailed as it has been in Algeria, for instance, where there had been protests over the past year over lack of democratic reform. Because of the caretaker regime’s blatant rigging attempt in front of the world, the fears that it would even tamper with the ballot boxes presently under lock and key are such that opposition parties have insisted on “keeping watch” on them physically. It would not be surprising that the regime would move to stop this activity, even though the participants have taken great care to observe COVOD-19 guidelines. Forewarned is forearmed on the PNC’s authoritarian imperative.
We do not need “firestick” to see what is clear in bright daylight.