From: umbacchu@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Emran Ally Bacchus)
Subject: wpa on elections 1992 in guyana
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 18:21:56 GMT

                                                 GUYANA:      
                                           WPA ON ELECTIONS 1992
   
The final results as announced by ELECTIONS COMMISSION read :
DLM(1517); NDF(73); NRP(114); PDM(307);PNC(135,156);PPP(162,197);
TUF(3,652); UGI(134); URP(1,421); UWP(18); WPA (5339).         
   Seats::::: PPP(28); PNC(23); TUF(1); WPA (1).

The election results show that the WPA  suffered a heavy defeat at
the polls and that the two old parties reasserted their dominance
of Guyanese politics . As WPA popularity grew, especially after the
launching of the manifesto, the two old parties began to select
issues other than policies to fight the WPA. Each of these parties,
the one based almost exclusively in the INDO-Guyanese Community and
the other in the AFRO-Guyanese Community, sensing a loss of SUPPORT
which was becoming critical (but mainly  affecting the P.N.C),
waged a house to house campaign to have the WPA hanged on its own
gallows . The PPP felt forced for it own survival to tell INDO-
Guyanese that the WPA was not what it claimed to be, but was an
African party with a secret plan to join the PNC in a coalition.
The PNC was equally vicious. it told the AFRO-Guyanese that the WPA
was an INDO-Guyanese party with a secret plan to join the PPP in a
coalition.

The people waited for some response from the WPA to these reports.
The WPA did not venture a clear denial because it did not want to
appear inflexible to a critical population.

In each case, the line of attack was aimed at awakening and exploiting racial
fears of African domination on the part Indians and of Indian domination on
the part of Africans. Whether people fully believed the propaganda or not, the
response of the TWO groups of voters was predictable. They abandoned the
multiracial party. The WPA was painted as acting counter to the interests of
each of the major groups and the great majority returned to those
parties promising defence of a race. This does not explain every vote, but it
explains the sudden switch in voter support from the WPA to the PNC and
PPP.

Thus the old parties have been pursuing the politics of racial
solidarity by other means. That is, each of them took steps to
secure a loyal ethnic vote and at the same time had marginal
campaigns to capture others outside its own ethnic camp. Both
failed to do this. The PNC however, was able to intimidate INDO-
Guyanese and other squatters in at least one place to vote for it
on promise of the house-lot they occupied before and during the
elections.

Since the WPA affronted both these old parties by elevating the
multi-racial political culture, the explanation of which they
regarded as a rebuke of their organisation they engaged in the
campaign of misrepresentation with energy and much success.


Note should be taken of the fact that on September 24, the WPA discovered
that "PPP/Civic" did not appear on the ballot paper and at once called for a
reprint. The Chair of the Elections Commission guaranteed that the error
would have no effect on the election and his assurance was accepted by the
PPP. Now the PNC has said it is consulting with its lawyers about election
petitions. Perhaps the P.N.C even inspired the grosser disruptions of the poll
so as to use them to discredit the election results. People close to what
happened during the election noted  a lot of multiple voting and impersonation
by the two old parties. The P.N.C's was a higher level and included seizure of
ballot boxes, takeover of polling stations, anti-personal violence and heavy
marking of ballots after the polls were officially closed.


First of all, there were some difficulty in establishing when the
polls closed .Scheduled to close at 6 pm, they were extended by way
of radio and television address by the then President following a
street riot outside the Elections Commission Building. According to
reports of polling agents and the press, voting in some  places was
going on at 1.20 am and up to 7 am the next day in other places. 
Even so, assuming polling to be official until 7:30 pm on polling
day, the last result had not yet reached the Commission 113 hours
after the officially revised time for the closing of the poll. On
Saturday, October 10, Stanley Singh, the Chief Elections Officer,
was giving out results of the Regional Elections when these results
had not been seen by the Chairman of the Elections Commission.  A
member of the Commission concluded that the former rulers had a
programme and that they were delaying the results in keeping with
that programme.In the December 7,1964 elections, the last results
came in on December 9,1964 at 12.30 pm - that is, within 60.5 hours
of the close of poll. In 1992, with counting of the ballots at the
place of poll (one of the chief gains of the electoral reform) and
with international observers present, results of the voting in many
divisions have yet to  be announced.


At 8 pm on Wednesday October 7, 1992 the results indicated a
victory for the PPP with about  56 % of the electorate ,with the
P.N.C running second with  about 38 % of the electorate. It was
then estimated that about 65 %  of the electorate went to the
polls. By 9:50 am on Friday October 9, 1992, the official results
reported a "Total Percent Turnout of 81 % . This sudden leap in the
percentage turnout is another one of the many mysteries to be
explained.


So-called disenfranchisement was widespread. Double and multiple
enfranchisement also took place. The Elections Commission  was
unwilling or unable to cope with the clerical work needed between
September 28 and October 4 to delete the names of disciplined
forces members who voted on September 28.          

Thus some poll officials and agents had no means of knowing that a
person listed to vote had previously voted on September 28. This
failure could let in about 6000 voters who should not be there and
should not vote a second time. For the second election running, the
P.N.C invaded polling  stations and disrupted elections procedures.
In 1985, President Hoyte blandly denied any election day incident.
In 1992, the incidents were so clearly established that no one has
even asked the P.N.C. leader whether he admits them or not.
In condemning the street  violence ,it can be assumed that he
distanced himself from the incidents.

The election was fair in the sense that the P.N.C lost much of its
former controls , especially of ballot boxes and ballot papers, and
another party was able to prevail. The aim of defeating the
dictatorship was achieved. Two questions arise.

Must Guyana expect a disruption of the polls at the hands of the
P.N.C every time  an election seems to be going against the party?
Secondly , what is the status of the most democratic elections in Guyana when
because of stubborn ethnic alignments the outcome can be known in advance?


                    PARLIAMENTARY SEATS


After a general election, 53 seats have to be filled by the parties
on the invitation of the Chief Elections Officer and proportionate
to the percentage of votes won.

Another ten seats in the National Assembly are filled by the ten
regional councils which meet separately and elect one member each
for the parliament.

In addition, there are another two parliamentary seats which are
allocated to the two members elected by the regions through the 
National Council of Regional Democratic Organs (N.C.L.D.O.). The 
N.C.L.D.O. is the upper tier of the regional system.
This brings the complement of members of the National Assembly to
65 , (53+10+2). All members have the right to vote.
In addition to these 65 Members of Parliament, the government may
increase the number of members of parliament by two means,
(1). it can appoint ministers from outside of parliament.
(2). It can create any number of members of vice-presidents , who
at once become ministers but will not appoint any.
These can come from members of parliament or from among persons
qualified to be members of parliament.

"STABROEK NEWS" editorial of Tuesday ,October 13,1992 gives the
position :
' Sixty-one of these seats have been finally allocated. Of the 53
elected the P.P.P. has 28, the P.N.C. has 23, the W.P.A. has 1, and
the T.U.F. has 1. The P.P.P. have won four regional seats giving
them a total of 32 seats and the P.N.C has won 4 for a total of 27.
Four remains to be determined. These are the two seats to be filled
by elections to be held by members of the Regional Democratic
Councils of Regions 8 and 9 and the two seats to be filled by an
election to be held by the N.C.L.D.O.'



In those two regions , no party has a majority  of the members of
the Regional Democratic Council . Under the constitution, each
council elects one of its members to serve as a member of the
National Assembly on such day as the President by proclamation
appoints. The member to be chosen will therefore depend on the
agreements reached between the parties involved. In Region 8 these
are the P.N.C., P.P.P. , W.P.A. . In Region 9 these are the P.N.C.
P.P.P. and T.U.F. If the P.P.P. can make a deal with both  the
W.P.A. and T.U.F  it could get both those seats giving it a
majority of 34 seats in the National Assembly and could use the
majority it would then have in the N.C.L.D.O. {P.P.P(6), P.N.C.(4)}
to select W.P.A. and T.U.F members to fill the remaining two seats.
In that event, the final composition of the National Assembly would
be P.P.P(34), P.N.C.(27), T.U.F(2), W.P.A(2). The  P.P.P WOULD THEN
HAVE A WORKING  MAJORITY in Parliament. It seems clear from the
constitution that all the 65 members have a vote ( and that has
been the practice ) so a majority of 33 is needed to pass laws. 
If the P.P.P does not reach agreement with either the W.P.A or
T.U.F. they could end up with a minority of 32 in the National
Assembly.... "
Since then agreement with W.P.A and T.U.F. has enabled the
Government to clinch a 35 seat majority in the National Assembly
"and has left the former ruling P.N.C with its 27 seats as the
largest Opposition party in Parliament." (CHRONICLE, October
28,1992).



NOTE BY OVERSEAS EDITOR: This can be regarded as Guyana's shame for
allowing its self to be conned into tribal politics; which is what
the P.N.C wanted. The former rulers are out of office but not
power...... Only a multi-racial democracy will take Guyana anywhere