The Stabroek dilemma

Dear Editor,
I’ve watched the situation at Stabroek evolve for years, and it’s clear that what we’re dealing with now, didn’t appear overnight. Stabroek has become a textbook example of what happens when institutions hesitate for too long. Lawlessness never emerges in a vacuum. Instead, it grows in the gaps where authority sends mixed signals, where rules are enforced only when convenient, and where officials hope that passive engagement will somehow maintain order. Anyone familiar with public administration knows that once a pattern like that takes hold, deviant behaviour starts to look legitimate. Indeed, it becomes part of the culture and, before long, tests the limits of the state’s authority.
That is exactly what happened outside the market. People like to pretend vendors suddenly materialised under the clock and across every square foot of the public space, but they didn’t. Their expansion was slow and predictable. The city allowed it. Enforcement softened. Political actors avoided confrontation. Consequently, parking bays and access lanes began to function as vending strips. Over time, the informal arrangement felt normal, even permanent.
Here’s the part many prefer not to confront. When informal vending becomes the de facto regulator of a busy public square, any effort to restore order will be described as displacement or oppression. Yet, the area was never designed to operate as a retail corridor. Stabroek is one of the most important transportation hubs in the capital. It moves thousands of commuters, drivers, delivery trucks and pedestrians every day. When a bus can’t make a simple turn without executing a three-point maneuver, you’re not managing a city—you’re managing chaos.
I don’t blame the vendors. After all, they responded to the signals they were given. If a system rewards encroachment with tolerance, people will naturally adapt to that environment. At the same time, I can’t pretend the state is wrong for reclaiming the space either. A functioning city needs predictable routes, safe walkways, and public infrastructure that supports movement, not congestion. Public space must work for everyone, not just those who have become comfortable occupying it.
This is why the Government’s upgrades, though disruptive, are necessary. After years of drift, you can’t restore order with gentle suggestions. Ultimately, recalibrating a system that has normalised disorder requires clear and decisive intervention. Strong political leadership has to step in, reassert the rule of law, restore confidence, and reinforce the standards that hold a city together. Waiting only increases the political and social cost of fixing the problem later.
Two things can be true at the same time. Vendors deserve stability and support. The wider public deserves order and mobility. However, what cannot continue is a downtown corridor shaped by hesitation and tolerated disorder. For Stabroek to function as a true capital city hub, the country must confront reality and restore balance with firmness and clarity.

Respectfully,
Brian Azore