Discrimination
Editorial
Stabroek News
April 2, 2001
The aftermath of the March 19 elections has brought with it a
torrent of charges and claims that the government and state entities
discriminate against those who are perceived not to be their
supporters and those who are Afro-Guyanese. These are, of course, very
serious charges and must be treated with honesty and openness.
First, it must be said that what we had on March 19, 2001 was a
general election. It was definitely not meant to be a signal for a
sudden national catharsis on the issue of discrimination and a panoply
of other grouses. In a democracy, the intervening period between
elections is intended to provide the space to grapple with these very
important issues and to test the government of the day and expose its
shortcomings in handling these. This is the proving ground of the
opposition and civil society groups and it is in this period they are
required to amass their evidence. These problems mustn't only surface
at elections!
So, instead of protests solely over the conduct of the elections, we
have a confused smorgasbord of issues which do not belong in the arena
of an electoral contest. This has evolved into impassioned
declarations from the protesters outside of the High Court and from
supporters of the PNC/R that five more years of this type of "discrimination"
and "ethnic exclusion" is unlivable and unthinkable and
therefore there must be some radical upheaval of the scheme of things.
If the opportunity is being seized in the light of the PPP/C's win to
bring these matters all to a head and foment maximum chaos it only
serves to reduce the intrinsic value of the issues at stake such as
discrimination and to reduce them to mere sideshows in the high stakes
political powerplay.
As surely as night follows day, discrimination on many grounds in the
public and private sectors exists. To what extent it is entrenched,
systemic and systematic is unknown. To what extent the government and
its state entities are unwilling to honestly confront it is unknown.
To what extent those who are aggrieved have a valid case to present is
unknown. These are all unknown quantities because those who would
champion the cause of persons who have been discriminated against have
done very little to document these cases and test them in the open. It
is certainly a daunting prospect for the average citizen who has been
given a raw deal at the Office of the President, at the Ministry of
Sport or at Linmine or has unfairly lost a lucrative contract to take
on the government on his/her own. Especially a government like the
PPP/Civic which has been overly and unduly sensitive to any type of
criticism and which has been unwilling to take decisive action where
good governance norms have been transgressed.
It should therefore have been and is the natural task of the PNC/R,
other political parties and civic groups like the African Cultural
Development Association and the Guyana Association of Professional
Engineers to document the presumed litany of egregious acts of
discrimination and to fight these before the law courts, the court of
public opinion and with those institutions concerned with these
transgressions.
The loudest declamations against the government on this issue have
come from the PNC/R - what has it to show to the public and its
supporters in documenting these cases? In the wake of the 1997
elections, its official organ, the New Nation ran blurbs in many of
its editions inviting those who had suffered discrimination to relate
these instances to the party so that they could be recorded. The
dialogue spawned by the Herdmanston Accord was meant to provide a
forum for these cases to be ventilated and remedial action taken by
the state. Nothing came of this.
In October 1997, a Prevention of Discrimination Act was signed into
law under then President Sam Hinds. It prohibited discrimination by a
person or body against another on the grounds of race, sex, religion,
colour or ethnic origin, indigenous extraction, social origin,
political opinion, pregnancy etc. The law set out how persons would be
protected against discrimination in employment. It included
progressive clauses such as equality of pay among men and women for
identical work. Penalties were set out and offences under the act were
to be treated in the manner provided by the Summary Jurisdiction Acts.
Was this law ever used to expose the discrimination by the government
and its state bodies? Did the PNC/R marshal its resources to put the
law to the test and goad the government to refine it and make it even
more powerful? No.
The period following 1997 offered the PNC/R and other groups an
important window to develop these claims of discrimination and not
wait until the 2001 elections and then suddenly uncork the genie
bottle. The work of the opposition does not begin when it wins the
election. Rather, it ends there. In opposition it must properly
represent its constituency and use every available means within the
democratic structure otherwise what is the use of clamouring for a
better system?
The Prevention of Discrimination Act has now been overtaken by a new
law that is more comprehensive in its construction and more potent. A
constitutional commission - the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC) has
been legislated for through the constitutional reform process. The Act
was assented to on August 11, 2000, but as dilatory as it has been in
activating key laws, the PPP/Civic did not make the necessary
appointments to enliven the commission.
This should definitely be one of the first areas for constructive
engagement between the new PPP/C government and the opposition to
ensure that the ERC is headed by an individual chosen on a consensual
basis. The ERC's work will also be underpinned by a tribunal at which
appeals of ERC decisions can be entertained and it has a wide-ranging
remit including providing for equality of opportunity between persons
of different ethnic groups, promoting the elimination of all forms of
discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, probing complaints of racial
discrimination and making recommendations on the remedial measures to
be taken and promoting equal access by persons of all ethnic groups to
all public or other services and facilities provided by the government
or other bodies.
This is the institutional mechanism that must now be fully utilised
by the PNC/R and all those who have legitimate complaints of
discrimination. This process is what the government must rapidly
breathe life into and instruct all its officers to assist if it has
nothing to fear and is truly prepared to correct whatever flaws exist
in its system of employing and apportioning contracts and services.
What must not continue to happen is the mouthing of claims of
discrimination without any basis being provided and which claims might
perhaps be nothing more than the blinkered imagination of a few or
contrivances simply to provide a fertile substrate for rejecting a
government which is not to one's liking.
Discrimination cannot be dealt with in abstraction. In cinematic
terminology it is time to show us the money. Let us deal with the
cases of discrimination which exist and begin to put this monster out
of business. It will be difficult for those who believe they have
credible cases to come forward. They have to be the Rosa Parks of the
US civil rights movement. They have to take the first step and use the
extant institutional checks and balances to seek justice.