Democracy Is More Than Elections

592 GUARDIAN♦ACCOUNTABILITY♦INTEGRITY IN JOURNALISM♦GUYANA

Democracy Is More Than Elections

---

OPINION BY: Hem Kumar- October 2026

October 5,1992, was unquestionably a defining moment for Guyana. The end of the PNC’s long period of electoral authoritarianism restored the people’s ability to choose their government through credible elections. That achievement should be protected, not reduced to a partisan talking point.

But the restoration of democracy cannot be measured only by whether votes are cast every five years. Democracy also requires an active Parliament, constitutional restraint, accountability to the public, space for dissent, independent institutions, transparent government, and meaningful opportunities for citizens and opposition representatives to question those who govern.

It is therefore striking that the PPP now invokes the very Constitution it once repeatedly condemned as defective, exclusionary and in need of fundamental reform.

For years, the PPP argued that Guyana’s constitutional arrangements concentrated excessive power in the Executive Presidency and failed to produce inclusive governance. Constitutional reform was presented as an urgent national necessity—not merely an academic exercise. Yet, once returned to office, the party appears to have discovered the political usefulness of the same architecture it had criticized so sharply.

While the PPP-C rightly condemned the attempt to overturn the 2020 election results, its record in office must also be judged by the health of Parliament as an institution. Guyanese have repeatedly raised concerns about long recesses, limited sittings and the extent to which the National Assembly has been permitted to function as a vigorous forum for scrutiny of executive power. A democracy requires more than elections; it requires a Parliament that meets regularly, debates freely and holds the Government accountable.

Democracy Cannot Be Selective

October 5, 1992, remains a defining date in Guyana’s history. It marked the return of credible elections after decades in which the people’s right to choose their government had been profoundly compromised.

But democracy is not merely the holding of elections or the installation of a government.  

Constitutional Convenience

For years, the PPP argued that Guyana’s Constitution vested too much authority in the Executive Presidency and did not adequately secure inclusive governance, shared decision-making or genuine national unity.

Those arguments did not disappear because the PPP-C returned to office. If anything, Guyana’s oil wealth, expanding public expenditure and concentration of decision-making make constitutional reform more urgent now than at any point before.

Yet the promised reform of the constitutional order has again been deferred, while the Government enjoys the utility of the same powerful executive structure it once criticized. That is the contradiction: condemning constitutional excess when out of office, then embracing constitutional convenience when in office.

Parliament Is Not Optional

The issue is not that Parliament did not convene after the 2020 elections. It did. The issue is whether Parliament has been allowed to operate as a meaningful, consistent and independent check on executive authority.

The current Parliament has had only four named sittings over more than 13 months. More troubling, those sittings have been principally driven by Government business rather than by a broad parliamentary agenda that reflects the urgent concerns of citizens, communities, workers, pensioners, farmers, small businesses and the opposition.

A Parliament reduced to a forum for the Government to process its own legislative program is not functioning at its democratic best. The National Assembly is not meant to be an occasional administrative extension of the Executive. It is meant to be the people’s House: a place where ministers are questioned, public spending is examined, contracts and policies are challenged, petitions are heard, and the concerns of every region can be placed on the national record.

Government business is necessary. But it cannot be the only business that matters.

The Democratic Test

The PPP-C is correct that the 2020 election crisis represented a grave threat to Guyana’s democracy. The right of Guyanese to determine their government had to be defended.

But a government that invokes democracy must also accept its continuing obligations after the election has been won. Electoral legitimacy is not a blank cheque for executive dominance, prolonged parliamentary inactivity or the marginalization of representatives elected to question and scrutinize those in power.

Oil Wealth Demands Oversight

This is particularly important in an oil-producing Guyana. The country is now managing unprecedented revenues, major infrastructure programs, large procurement contracts, land allocations, environmental questions and far-reaching development decisions.

Those matters cannot be left substantially to Cabinet announcements, ministerial statements and executive discretion. They require continuous parliamentary examination and public disclosure.

Guyana does not need a Parliament that appears only when the Government requires legislation, supplementary funds, budgets or approval for its program. It needs a Parliament that sits regularly and has the time, tools and institutional independence to interrogate how public money is spent and whose interests are being served. 

The Executive may enjoy a parliamentary majority, but that does not mean the National Assembly should be sidelined. In fact, a commanding majority makes regular parliamentary oversight even more necessary, not less.

Constitutional Convenience

The central irony is hard to avoid. The PPP-C condemns the former PNC administration’s record of authoritarianism and party paramountcy, yet it has embraced practices that reflect the same unhealthy governing instinct: the elevation of executive control above institutional accountability.

No serious observer is suggesting that the present era is identical to the pre-1992 period. The histories, circumstances and scale of abuses are not interchangeable. But democratic decline does not always arrive through the open cancellation of elections. It can also develop through gradual normalization:

⇒ Parliament is delayed, marginalized or made perfunctory.

⇒ Major decisions are made without adequate public consultation.

⇒ Constitutional reform is repeatedly promised but indefinitely deferred.

⇒  State resources and information are controlled from the center.

⇒ Critics are dismissed as enemies rather than treated as participants in democratic life.

⇒ Transparency becomes a slogan rather than a governing discipline.

A democracy can retain elections and still suffer from an imbalance of power that undermines public confidence.

 A Promise Deferred

The PPP-C statement says it will ensure “the transparent management of public resources” and fight corruption “in all of its manifestations.” Those are welcome commitments—but commitments demand measurable proof.

Guyana’s oil wealth makes constitutional reform, parliamentary scrutiny and institutional independence more urgent than ever. Vast public revenues, major infrastructure contracts, land allocations, procurement decisions and development priorities cannot be left substantially to executive discretion. The larger the public purse, the stronger the guardrails must be.

A serious democratic agenda would include:

⇒ A clear, public timetable for constitutional reform.

⇒ Regular and robust sittings of the National Assembly.

⇒ Stronger parliamentary committees with real access to records, contracts and officials.

⇒ Full transparency in public procurement, oil-revenue management and major development projects.

⇒ Protection for independent media, civil society, whistleblowers and dissenting voices.

⇒ Reforms that reduce excessive concentration of authority in the Executive Presidency.

 The Test of October 5

The PPP-C is entitled to commemorate October 5, 1992. But it cannot own that date while ignoring its deeper meaning.

Democracy was not restored so that one party could replace another at the commanding heights of the state. It was restored so that no government—regardless of party, race, history or electoral majority—could operate beyond sustained public scrutiny.

The true tribute to the struggle for democracy is not another anniversary statement condemning the sins of yesterday’s rulers. It is the willingness to submit today’s rulers to the same democratic standards.

Guyana must reject party paramountcy in every form: the crude authoritarianism of the past and the constitutional convenience, executive overreach and institutional neglect of the present.

October 5 Belongs to Guyanese

The PPP-C is entitled to commemorate October 5, 1992. But that date belongs to all Guyanese—not to one party and not to any government.

Its meaning is larger than the defeat of one administration and the rise of another. It is the principle that no party, however popular or historically significant, should be permitted to dominate the State without meaningful oversight.

Guyana rejected party paramountcy in 1992. It must reject every modern form of it now: executive overreach, constitutional convenience, weakened parliamentary scrutiny and the belief that an electoral majority relieves a government of its duty to answer to the people