Purgatory
Ian on Sunday
Stabroek News
April 1, 2001
This seems to be a race in
which there is no finishing tape but only endless running towards mutual
exhaustion. It seems - I write it with sadness but also with a strong
sense of inevitability - that we are not going to have anything like a
gracious concession, much less a warm shake of the hand and "well done"
acknowledgement with a simple vow to do better next time bringing a
sporting conclusion to the matter. Queensberry rules and Westminster model
are concepts that simply do not apply here. It has been clear for a long
time that we ourselves are somehow going to have to invent how this game
is played and how it ends. We have not done very well so far.
If the
result of this election - free, fair, transparent, closely observed,
clear-cut, unanimously certified and fully adjudicated - cannot be
accepted then no election in Guyana, I repeat no election, can ever be
accepted except an election which both main
parties win - if you get my
drift. In such circumstances, of what use is an election and indeed of
what use is the Constitution?
As I wrote those words it did occur to me
that perhaps the result of this election might have been more readily
accepted if there had indeed been two winners - in other words, if the
PPP/C had won the Presidency and the PNC/R with the others had won
the
Parliament. That might have made life easier for Guyana. That might
have introduced dialogue and inclusion not by winner's choice but by
institutional necessity and probably that would have been a good thing.
But that did not happen. Mr. Bharrat Jagdeo won the Presidency easily and
the PPP/C won the Parliament. That should have settled matters but,
plainly, it hasn't.
In this situation, God knows what unreasonable
elements in the society are hoping to achieve. But, as I understand it,
reasonable elements in the opposition while accepting that the PPP/C won
the March 19th election insist that a 53% majority cannot be construed in
Guyana as conferring 100% governing authority on the winner.
Such an
interpretation is not exactly in line with democratic practice a la
Westminster but in the circumstances of Guyana it is an interpretation
which has been around for a long time, which has now emerged very
precisely, and which will have to be taken seriously by President Jagdeo
and his party.
What is being forcefully urged is that the 42% of the
population represented by the PNC/R must see, feel, and quite quickly
actually experience tangible evidence that those who represent their
interests have a real share in making the policies, supervising the
programmes and exercising the powers directly affecting the lives of the
42%. This, it is urged, cannot be left to the goodwill, the good
intentions, the rhetorical promises, even the actual, but unilaterally
conferred, "scraps from the table" rewards and benefits of the Government
of the day.
There is one large immediate advantage in taking this
democratically unorthodox interpretation seriously. It might prevent
Guyana being put further through the wringer of legal challenge and
election petition, the accompanying dialogue of the deaf, and the
permanent political instability and consequential economic stagnation
which has tormented and traumatised the society for so long - what the
Chief Justice succinctly sums up as national "self-flagellation", a sort
of Purgatory in which we wander like lost souls uncertain about our future
and the future of our children.
There is a good case for giving serious
consideration - through urgent dialogue at the top level of Government and
Opposition - how best in specific ways and through agreed institutions to
give effect to the concept "loser takes quite a lot."
However, there is
no hope - nor should there be - of such a dialogue getting properly
started if the results of a valid election under the Constitution are not
acknowledged, unrest in the streets continue, mob rule threatens,
incitement to mistrust, lawlessness, and even hatred poisons relations
between the races and the country gradually becomes ungovernable. Along
that way if long pursued looms not purgatory but the Inferno. Now surely
is the time for all men and women of goodwill and love of country to raise
their voices for peace and, within peace, a lasting accommodation between
the "sides."
As I was writing this column, in depression approaching
despair I have to confess, I was also reading in between times an article
on Dante Alighieri and The Divine Comedy, which has been called the most
magnificent single poem ever written- As I read, my depression did not
exactly lift but at least entering into the world of great poetry I was
able to put into some sort of perspective the trouble and violence and
malice and irrationality and incipient anarchy which exists in Guyana at
this time. After all, Dante was himself cruelly mistreated and driven into
exile from his beloved Florence by political violence and so he knew a
thing or two about a bitterly divided society, civil disorder and virulent
public discord. In Canto VI of the Purgatorio just listen to this
resounding indictment of his native land and tell me if you do not hear an
echo:
Oh slavish Italy, hostel of wretchedness,
ship with no pilot in
the great tempest .....
while those now living in you are forever
at war, and those whom
one wall and one
moat enclose are gnawing on each other.
At least out of Dante's experience came great poetry. But, poor Guyana, we do not even have Martin Carter with us still to make poetry out of our woes.