Guyana’s President Bharrat Jagdeo has been complaining to the world over that I am falsely accusing his government of being an “ethnocracy.” He regurgitated this complaint when he met with me the Caricom Heads of Government conference in New York.

His hallow protestations have emboldened one of his appeasers. It has provided a rationale for the prejudicial Stabroek Newspapers in Guyana to muster the effrontery to challenge persons who have justly characterized the PPP government as an ethnocracy in letters or articles published in that newspaper.  Consequently, Stabroek has been censoring the use of the term “ethnocracy,” as if to condition the minds of Guyanese, in order to assuage PPP racism and dissuade exposure of ethnic triumphalism and supremacy. This must not be allowed to contend.

So as to demonstrate Stabroek’s Anti-African bias; its appeasement of racists as well as efforts to expurgate criticism of PPP racism, I wish to examine the definition of “ethnocracy” and provide evidence of PPP rabid racism.

What is an Ethnocracy?

(i)       According to Internet encyclopedia, Wikipedia, an “Ethnocracy is a form of government where representatives of a particular ethnic group hold a number of government posts disproportionately large to the percentage of the total population that the particular ethnic group(s) represents and use them to advance the position of their particular ethnic group(s) to the detriment of others.”

(ii)      Dr. Oren Yiftachel, internationally renowned Professor of urban planning, geography, political science and Middle Eastern Studies, in his publication “Ethnocracy: Land and Identity Politics in Israel/Palestine” wrote that ethnocracy is “a political regime that facilitates expansion and control by a dominant ethnicity in contested lands. It is neither democratic nor authoritarian, with rights and capabilities depending primarily on ethnic origin and geographic location.”

(iii) According to the University of Oslo, an “ethnocracy is a political regime which, in contrast to democracy, is instituted on the basis of qualified rights to citizenship, and with ethnic affiliation (defined in terms of race, descent, religion, or language) as the distinguishing principle. The raison d’être of the ethnocracy is to ensure that the most important instruments of state power are controlled by a specific ethnic collectivity. All other considerations concerning the distribution of power are ultimately subordinated to this basic intention.”

Demographics of Guyana;

Ethnic groups: East Indian 43.5%, Black/African 33.2%, mixed race 16.7%, Amerindian 9.2%, other 0.46%^. Religions: Christian 50%, Hindu 33%, Muslim 9%, other 8%.

Realities of the Government of Guyana:

1. President Bharrat Jagdeo’s government has twenty-two Cabinet ministers; four of whom are black, and two are Amerindian.

2. 90% of the ruling PPP’s Members of Parliament are of Indian extraction.

3. 90% of the members of government commissions, boards of directors as well as government members on boards of private and semi-private entities are of Indian extraction.

4. The PPP regime has used the resources of the state to develop non-black villages, may be justifiably so, but have simultaneously conducted a campaign to destroy, subjugate, stagnate, strangle and impoverish African villages and Towns, such as Buxton, Golden Grove, Victoria, Linden, etc.

5. The PPP government has progressively raised wages for sugar workers a predominantly Indian demographic and its main political constituency, but has resisted increasing public service wages at very instant. 80% of public servants in Guyana are Afro-Guyanese.

6. The PPP government has consistently engaged in union busting in an attempt to destroy Afro-Guyanese unions. It arbitrarily suspended union dues for the public service union, and has refused to turnover such dues to the union although the Supreme Court has ordered it to do so.  It has also suspended the government subvention to Critclow Labor College which conducted a number of pre-university courses for Afro-Guyanese and others, and has been attempting to destroy the Guyana Bauxite & General Workers Union (GB&GWU).

7. The PPP government has engaged in the systematic torture of Afro-Guyanese citizens and has been directly involved in state sponsored extrajudicial killings of over 400 young Afro-Guyanese men.

8. They have purged the leadership of the public service to reflect their ethnic majority.

9. 90% of Guyana’s Ambassadorial representation is of Indian extraction.

10. Over 90% of government contracts are awarded to Indian contractors.

11. 90% of judicial appointments are ethnic driven.

12. The government has been directly discriminating against Guyanese African bauxite workers. This has recently been condemned by regional and international labor fraternity, including the AFL-CIO and met with intransigence from the Labor Minister.

In support of my aforementioned contentions, I wish to cite the findings of the United Nations Independent Expert on Minority Issues, Ms. Gay McDougall (http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/pdfid/49bfa6ec2.pdf), in her report dated February 23, 2009, which was presented to the United Nations General Assembly.

(a) Section 34-35 of the report states that: “The independent expert encountered claims of widespread and institutionalized discrimination against members of the Afro-Guyanese community and indigenous peoples. Some described the “victimization” of poor Afro-Guyanese and an informal system of rights and privileges in society to which they lack access.”

(b) Section 36 States; “Many consider that economic policies have been formulated to benefit the Indian population at the expense of Afro-Guyanese jobs and income. Union representatives noted a trend of State support for Indian-dominated industries such as the sugar industry, while allowing the predominantly Afro-Guyanese bauxite mining industry to decline and be privatized resulting in the loss of thousands of Afro-Guyanese jobs. One union representative described a “policy to economically destroy the African people”.

(c) Section 39 states that “Serious allegations were raised of discrimination and corruption in government procurement of goods, services and public works contracts. There is a widely held belief that government contracts are systematically awarded to companies supporting the Government, Indo-Guyanese companies, and those in which government officials have personal interests.

(d) Section 43 states that “Afro-Guyanese trade union sources consider that the Government has been actively pursuing a discriminatory policy and programmes against Afro-Guyanese. They claim that the Government is working to undermine and divide the union movement, with the aim of weakening the primarily African Guyana Trades Union Congress (GTUC). They suggest that the Government orchestrated a split in the union movement by initiating and supporting a parallel union body, the Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Guyana (FITUG). Union representatives believe that government actions are discriminatory, politically and racially motivated and an attempt to curtail the legitimate powers of the unions that have previously led to strike action over labor rights and government activities.

(e) Section 65 states “Concerns were expressed by Afro-Guyanese and others regarding numerous killings of young Afro-Guyanese men from 2002 to the present day, and the existence of what has been described as a “phantom death squad”. A wide array of people within the community put the number of deaths at between 200 and 400. The reports note execution style killings, disappearances and failure to adequately record or investigate the murders. The perception is of a collusion of Government and law enforcement with known criminals to facilitate the targeting and killing of young African males.”

(f) 70 states that, “NGOs and community members raised concerns regarding serious rights violations against Afro-Guyanese including arbitrary detention without trial, torture, deaths and mistreatment in custody, and killings of innocent civilians during operations by the joint services… It is claimed that, taken as a whole, these evidence a wider pattern and practice of gross rights violations against Afro-Guyanese and a failure of due process.”

These are the facts and empirical evidence. I challenge President Jagdeo and Stabroek News to disprove this evidence which clearly establish an entrenched PPP ethnocracy in Guyana, and let the people judge.