Attachment_J.10d_-_Final_Guyana_DRG_Assessment_Public_Version.pdf

MARCH 2016

This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for

International Development. It was prepared by Tetra Tech ARD.

DEMOCRACY, HUMAN

RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE

ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA

FINAL REPORT

This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development by Tetra Tech ARD, through a Task Order under the Analytical Services III Indefinite Quantity Contract Task Order No. AID-OAA-TO-12-00016.

This report was prepared by:

Tetra Tech ARD

159 Bank Street, Suite 300

Burlington, Vermont 05401 USA

Telephone: (802) 658-3890

Fax: (802) 658-4247

Tetra Tech ARD Contact:

Kelly Kimball, Project Manager Tel: (802) 658-3890 ext. 2308

Email: kelly.kimball@tetratech.com

DEMOCRACY, HUMAN

RIGHTS, AND

GOVERNANCE

ASSESSMENT

OF GUYANA

FINAL REPORT

MARCH 2016

DISCLAIMER

The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................ I ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................ III EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. VI

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY

1.2 BACKGROUND

2.0 KEY CHALLENGES TO DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE

2.1 CONSENSUS

2.2 INCLUSION

2.3 COMPETITION AND POLITICAL ACCOUNTABILITY

2.4 RULE OF LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS

2.5 GOVERNMENT RESPONSIVENESS AND EFFECTIVENESS

2.6 DRG CHALLENGE

3.0 KEY POLITICAL ACTORS AND INSTITUTIONS

3.1 THE EXECUTIVE

3.2 THE LEGISLATURE

3.3 THE JUDICIARY AND LEGAL PROFESSIONALS

3.4 NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTIONS

3.5 SECURITY SERVICES

3.6 LOCAL GOVERNMENT

3.7 POLITICAL PARTIES AND ELECTORAL INSTITUTIONS

3.8 CIVIL SOCIETY

3.9 MEDIA

3.10 PRIVATE SECTOR

3.11 KEY POPULATION GROUPS

3.12 INTERNATIONAL AND GLOBAL ACTORS

4.0 OPERATIONAL AND PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENT

4.1 BROADER FOREIGN POLICY AND USAID DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS

4.2 USAID’S CURRENT DRG PROGRAM

4.3 OTHER USAID AND U.S. GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS

4.4 USAID RESOURCES AND INTENTIONS

4.5 DONOR COORDINATION

4.6 PRACTICAL CONSTRAINTS ON THE RECIPIENT SIDE

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE USAID DRG STRATEGY AND PROGRAM

5.1 STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

5.2 DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE OBJECTIVE

5.3 DEVELOPMENT HYPOTHESIS

5.4 PRIORITY SUBSECTORS

5.4.1 Near-Term Critical Processes and Actors to Support

5.4.2 Medium- to Long-Term Important Processes and Actors to Support

5.5 ILLUSTRATIVE ACTIVITIES

5.5.1 Support Constitutional Reforms

5.5.2 Strengthen Checks and Balances

5.5.3 Strengthen Local Governance

5.6 GENDER CONSIDERATIONS

5.7 SEQUENCING

ANNEX 1: INTERVIEWS

ii DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA

ANNEX 2: BIBLIOGRAPHY

ANNEX 3: HISTORICAL POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT

DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA iii

ACRONYMS AND

ABBREVIATIONS

ABCE America, Great Britain, Canada, and the European Union

AFC Alliance for Change

AG Attorney General

APNU A Partnership for National Unity

BBC British Broadcasting Commission

CAC Child Advocacy Center

CANU Customs Anti-Narcotic Unit

CARICOM Caribbean Community and Common Market

CBSI Caribbean Basin Security Initiative

CSO Civil Society Organization

DCHA Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance

DEA Drug Enforcement Agency

DFID Department for International Development (UK)

DO Development Objective

DOJ Department of Justice

DRG Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance

DSL Digital Subscriber Line

EDC Educational Development Center

EITI Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative

EPP Elections and Political Processes

ERC Ethnic Relations Commission

ESC Eastern and Southern Caribbean

EU European Union

FAC Foreign Affairs Canada

FBO Faith-Based Organizations

FY Fiscal Year iv DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA

GAP Guyana Action Party

GBA Guyana Bar Association

GBV Gender Based Violence

GDF Guyana Defense Force

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GECOM Guyana Elections Commission

GGDMA Guyana Gold and Diamond Miners Association

GGMC Guyana Geology and Mines Commission

GHRA Guyana Human Rights Association

GNBA Guyana National Broadcasting Authority

GoG Government of Guyana

GPA Guyana Press Association

GPF Guyana Police Force

GT&T Guyana Telephone and Telegraph

HIV/AIDS Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Auto-Immune Deficiency Syndrome

IDB Inter-American Development Bank

IMC Interim Management Committee

INL Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement

IOM International Organization for Migration

IRI International Republican Institute

LAPOP Latin American Public Opinion Project

LEAD Leadership and Democracy Project

LGBTI Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex

MCC Millennium Challenge Corporation

MMU Media Monitoring Unit

MP Member of Parliament

NCC National Coordinating Committee (HIV/AIDS)

NDC Neighborhood Democratic Council

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NHRI National Human Rights Institutions

OAS Organization of American States

DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA v

OLPF One Laptop Per Family Program

PAC Public Accounts Committee

PNC People’s National Congress

PNC/R PNC Reform

PPP People’s Progressive Party

PPP/C PPP/Civic

PSC Private Sector Commission

RDC Regional Democratic Council

ROAR Rise, Organize and Rebuild

SAF Strategic Assessment Framework

SASOD Society Against Sexual Orientation Discrimination

SKYE Skills and Knowledge for Youth Employment Project

SSR Security Sector Reform

TA Technical Assistance

TIP Trafficking in Persons

TOT Trainer of Trainers

U.S. United States

UF United Force

UK United Kingdom

UN United Nations

UNDP United Nations Development Program

UNESCO United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization

USAID United States Agency for International Development

USD U.S. Dollar

VAT Value-Added Tax

WPA Working People’s Alliance vi DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

The May 2015 election of a multi-ethnic, reform-minded coalition brought a fresh opportunity for Guyana to move toward a more responsive and accountable state of governance. However, this democratic outcome is far from certain. The coalition government faces deep-seated legacies of single party domination; politically driven ethnic divisions; and a centralized patron-clientelist system with weak, unaccountable, and unresponsive government institutions. Changing this system will not be easy, especially for a tenuous political coalition, inexperienced in governing and confronted by an entrenched opposition and a frustrated population with unrealistically high expectations.

It was too soon to tell how this transition will end during the assessment and whether reforms will stall.

Guyana’s past demonstrates that these windows do not remain open for long as engrained practices take over and the government assumes the attributes of the past. Political missions have moved swiftly to support the reform efforts diplomatically and through discrete mission funds. The Democracy, Governance, and Human Rights (DRG) Assessment recommends that development agencies follow suit to take advantage of these opportunities quickly to deepen democratic development in Guyana. In particular, the DRG assessment recommends that the United States Agency for International

Development (USAID) provide immediate assistance to support the constitutional reform process, bring balance to Guyana’s governance, and strengthen local government and its first elected local governments in 23 years. This should be followed by a bilateral DRG program for the medium- to long-term that could help institutionalize the reforms and ensure their consolidation.

CONTEXT

Governance in Guyana has been characterized by long periods of one-party rule, ethnically divisive politics, inefficient government, and corruption. Its oldest political party, the People’s Progressive Party

(PPP), split before independence, creating the two main parties: the PPP and the People’s National

Congress (PNC), which alternated power until 2015. The PNC was in power from independence until

1992 through tight centralized party control and rigged elections. In 1992, international mediation led to credible elections and a change in government to the PPP/Civic (PPP/C) party. The PNC did not accept those election results or the PPP/C’s next win in 1997 and violence erupted after both elections. The

Caribbean Community (CARICOM) negotiated new elections in 2001 that were to be preceded by constitutional reforms. The PPP/C went on to win the elections in 2001, 2006, and 2011.

In 2011, the PPP/C failed to gain the majority votes in the National Assembly, resulting in a minority government for its president. This created a political stalemate that led to the president suspending the parliament after a threat of a no-confidence vote. Parliament was eventually dissolved and new elections held in May 2015. These elections were won by the PNC/Reform (PNC/R) -dominated A Partnership for

National Unity (APNU) that formed a coalition with the moderate, multi-ethnic Alliance For Change

(AFC). The APNU + AFC ran on a democratic reform agenda, promising constitutional reforms and the holding of long-delayed local elections. It won a one-seat majority in the Assembly and faces the PPP/C in opposition that has challenged the election results in court.

Guyana’s political parties reflect its ethnic makeup. The PPP courted the Indo-Guyanese, which made up more than 40 percent of the population, while the PNC courted the Afro-Guyanese who comprise about

30 percent of the population. The indigenous and mixed populations provide the swing votes. The focus

DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA vii on ethnicity in politics led to perceived and actual exclusion of one group or the other depending on which one was in power.

Most of Guyana’s 748,000 population lives along its coast, with its vast interior home to its indigenous populations and others. It is rich in natural resources, most notably gold, diamond, bauxite, oil, and timber. Although it is in South America, Guyana identifies culturally and politically with the English-speaking Caribbean. It has a stark center-periphery difference, with the power and most of the services at the center. Guyana has an increasingly high level of crime and violence, domestic violence, and gun proliferation. It is a trafficking point for drugs from South America and for trafficking in persons (TIP). It has a disproportionately high suicide rate, especially among Indo-Guyanese and youth. It suffers from an enormous “brain drain,” with 90 percent of its tertiary-level graduates migrating to other countries, most notably the U.S., Canada, and the Caribbean.

KEY CHALLENGES TO DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE

The assessment found problems in all five elements of democracy, human rights, and governance. The most critical were in the areas of competition and political accountability and government responsiveness and effectiveness.

1. Consensus. The Guyanese have a shared political culture and the belief that democracy is the only legitimate form of government, but long-standing acrimony between the PPP/C and PNC/R makes achieving consensus on policies, committee appointments, and constitutional reform priorities difficult at the national level. However, social capital and the shared desire for change facilitate consensus building at the regional and local levels.

2. Inclusion. No group is legally excluded or formally disenfranchised. However, there is perceived and real ethnic exclusion from the political processes and social discrimination based on race, gender, socio-economics, and sexual orientation. There is also de facto discrimination of indigenous people and those who live in the periphery in terms of access to social services and economic development.

3. Competition and political accountability. Historically, political competition has been dominated by two main parties aligned largely along ethnic lines. Elections incite and exacerbate ethnic tensions as the de facto winner-take-all system promotes one-party rule. Power is centralized in the executive and the formal check and balance system is marginalized by ineffective/nonfunctioning institutions, patron-client relationships, and corruption. Success of the multi-party coalition in the 2015 elections may signal a shift toward more issue-based politics, but it faces stiff opposition from the losing party.

The introduction of single member seats in the March 2016 local elections offers an opportunity for change.

4. Rule of law and human rights. Guyana’s legal framework provides for the rule of law and protection of human rights but implementation is problematic. Citizen access to justice and quality of services depends on physical location and personal situation. National human rights institutions are not fully established or effective and criminality and violence are prevalent. Gender-based violence

(GBV) is a major problem as is trafficking in persons and drugs.

5. Government responsiveness and effectiveness. The state is well formed, established, and functioning, but heavily centralized with cumbersome procedures and institutional arrangements.

Too-few resources are used for public good. Rural and hinterland communities are disproportionately affected. Institutions that should promote service delivery and accountability are weak or nonfunctional. There is no real devolution of authority to local government and even the most localized decisions are taken by the central government.

viii DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA

KEY POLITICAL ACTORS AND INSTITUTIONS

Political power is concentrated in the executive, and more specifically within the office of the president.

President David Granger, a former military officer and elected leader of the PNC/R, was elected in May

2015. President Granger and the coalition government enjoyed a honeymoon period that is now largely over. The APNU + AFC coalition is stable and expected to last until the 2020 election, although they need to maintain cohesion and manage tensions arising between the two parties. They ran on a reform platform that promised constitutional reforms and the holding of long-delayed local elections. Their election was the first change of government in 23 years. They say the right things about reforms, including asking donors for DRG support that had been resisted by the former PPP/C government.

However, it is still too early to tell if this reform resolve will last.

The president controls government through his cabinet of government ministers, who are also Members of Parliament (MPs). MPs are elected through a closed party list system and are answerable to their parties rather than to the voters. The coalition has a one-seat majority in the National Assembly, where the winning parties’ majority vote ensures assent to government-proposed legislation. The sole exception was the minority government in 2011 that ended in political stalemate and the early dissolution of parliament.

The courts are one of the few means to get redress in the country. However, the system is slow and cumbersome. The Attorney General (AG) has asked for donor support to reform the system. Guyana adopted the Caribbean Court of Justice as its final court of appeals and the AG noted that the coalition government inherited sizeable judgments from that court against the former PPP/C government. Access to justice in the interior is difficult, where the Magistrates’ Court sittings are held in hinterland regional capitals only once every three months, as there is currently only one magistrate. Most of the national human rights institutions are not effective or functioning because of stalled appointments, among other issues.

There is significant need to reform the Guyana Police Force (GPF) and strengthen its investigations and prosecutions. An estimated 90 percent of prosecutions are unsuccessful1 and it is the least-trusted institution in the country2. The Guyana Defense Force (GDF) is a trusted institution and seen as above politics. It recently re-joined with the GPF to fight the upsurge in crime.

Local government has been a neglected actor yet holds the greatest potential for democratic governance.

Elections for Municipal Councils and Neighborhood Democratic Councils (NDCs) have not been held since 1994, leaving in power those elected decades ago, or replaced by centrally appointed persons or

Interim Management Committees (IMCs). The 10 regions of Guyana are managed by Regional

Democratic Councils (RDCs), which have held regular elections. Indigenous villages are managed by

Village Councils, who are elected every three years. Political dynamics at the regional and local levels tend to be more issue-based with officials working across party lines. The coalition announced local government elections for March 2016 and the creation of the Local Government Commission to provide oversight and reduce centralized ministry control.

Guyana has a number of political parties in addition to the PPP/C and PNC/R. This includes A

Partnership for National Unity, formed in 2011 by the PNC/R and five smaller parties; and the Alliance for Change, founded in 2005, which is multi-ethnic and issues-based. Elections are administered by the

Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM). Although its commission is politically balanced, GECOM is widely perceived as professional, yet is always the scapegoat for the losing party as a way dismiss their

1 Government of Guyana. Justice System Strategy, 2006–2010. p 8.

2 LAPOP AmericasBarometer. (2014). The Political Culture of Democracy in the Americas: Democratic Governance Across 10 years of the AmericasBaromter.

DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA ix election loss. The level of mistrust is so high that it still relies on a donor-funded international technical assessor to serve as an objective witness to the process.

Civil society is dynamic and engaged at all levels nationwide. They serve on many government boards.

Few however, consistently and actively engage in DRG. The media is pluralistic and politicized, with the state media having the only nationwide reach. Self-censorship is common as previous governments retaliated against critical coverage. The state media provided pro-state coverage in the past. The private sector is dependent on government favors and patronage and hopes the current government will provide a more accessible business environment.

Most indigenous people live in the hinterland areas and receive support from the Ministry of

Indigenous People’s Affairs, often bypassing regular development processes and institutions, such as the elected RDCs. Guyana’s Indigenous people have issues of land/mineral rights and limited services because of their remoteness. Other peripheral populations also face limited services and high levels of unemployment as bauxite mines closed and the sugar industry plummeted. Guyana has a large Diaspora population with remittances making up more than 15 percent of GDP.3

The international community plays an influential role, even under the previous governments. The

ABCE Group of America, Britain, Canada and the European Union is active along with United Nations

(UN) agencies and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), which is Guyana’s largest donor.

OPERATIONAL AND PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENT

The United States refocused its mission priorities in late 2015 in light of Guyana’s changed circumstances, most notably the change of government; discovery of significant maritime oil reserves;

end of Venezuela’s rice-for-oil arrangement that threatens the Guyanese economy but opens opportunities for clean, renewable energy; and Venezuela’s renewed claims for Guyana’s Essequibo territory.

USAID’s efforts in Guyana are managed by its Eastern and Southern Caribbean regional office in

Barbados since 2012. It will implement a USD 700,000-project provided under the global Elections and

Political Processes (EPP) Fund to support voter education for the local elections and social cohesion efforts with parties, newly elected leaders, and their constituents. USAID also has a USD 7 million, five-year Skills and Knowledge for Youth Employment (SKYE) Project funded through the Caribbean Basin

Security Initiative (CBSI), which will end this year. Other CBSI-funded activities are implemented and/or planned by the State Department with the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and Department of Justice

(DOJ) for police training, counter-narcotics, and the courts.

U.S. Government priorities are to improve Guyana’s willingness and capacity to govern effectively while respecting the rule of law, achieve a clean and secure energy future, and expand economic opportunities and prosperity. Within DRG objectives, focus on improving citizen security; strengthening rule of law for more accountable governance; strengthening civil society; supporting women and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) persons; and addressing the root causes of violence. USAID has no current resources for a DRG program, but anticipates seeking additional funding to support Guyana’s reform process. DRG assistance was requested by the Prime Minister in a July 2015 letter to

USAID/Washington that also praised the inroads made by USAID’s previous DRG program, despite the difficult circumstances created by the previous government.

STRATEGIC AND PROGRAMMATIC RECOMMENDATIONS

The main challenge to DRG in Guyana is its legacy of political parties organized along ethnic lines; of single party dominance; and its centralized patron-clientelist system that contributed to weak, 3 Maldonado and Hayem. (2015). Remittances to Latin America and the Caribbean set a new record high in 2014. Pp. 3 and 30.

x DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA unaccountable, unresponsive, and ineffective government institutions. The dysfunction in its political system has led to a feeling of hopelessness among many Guyanese, high levels of emigration, and insecurity.

The election of a multi-ethnic, multi-party coalition brought a fresh opportunity to Guyana to make these substantive democratic reforms that could transform its political system and make it more effective, accountable, and inclusive. USAID should take advantage of the window of opportunity that is open now to support the reform process that is underway that can strengthen Guyana’s governance, balance the power of the executive, start the devolution of power to local government, and ensure a more accountable and responsive government. If adopted and implemented, these democratic reforms can address the over-centralization of power, address politicized and nonperforming institutions that were found during the assessment, and increase governance effectiveness and responsiveness.

However, this outcome is far from certain. There are indications of significant change, but there are also reasons for concern. Time is of the essence as this window may not be open for long. The assessment team estimates it will close within the next 18 to 24 months as the focus shifts to the 2019 local elections and 2020 national elections. Some believe it will close even sooner if not supported, citing rising citizen anger and impatience against the slowness of the reforms and signs of business-as-usual.

The assessment team recommends USAID focus on a two-tiered strategy. In the near term, focus on the reform processes, key oversight mechanisms, information flow, and newly elected local authorities. In the medium to long term, reinstate a DRG program that can make a more substantive contribution to strengthening Guyana’s democratic institutions and system. It does not recommend political party assistance in the near term as the parties are internally regrouping and intending to work out their own issues and are not open to assistance at this time.

As a result, the recommended DRG objective is more accountable, responsive, and balanced governance in Guyana.

Recommended programmatic priorities are:

1. Constitutional reform through support for the current reform process and the implementation of previous constitutional reforms. These can help balance the power of the executive, address the winner-takes-all nature of the political and electoral systems, and devolve power to local government.

Near-term priorities are reform content and consultations, constitutional referendum (if held), and constitutional commission appointments. Mid- to long-term priorities are the implementation of the new constitutional reforms and strengthening the Human Rights and Integrity Commissions that provide oversight and citizen protection.

2. Strengthened checks and balances through strengthening key institutions and increasing access to information and evidence-based decision making. This can help increase accountability; balance the dominance of the executive; address issues of cronyism, impunity, and corruption; and ensure the rule of law is applicable to all. Near-term priorities are assessments in the key areas of rule of law, electoral system, and economic governance and consideration for a small flexible fund to support quick-impact, low-cost changes within key institutions. Mid- to long-term priorities include parliamentary oversight and outreach.

3. Strengthened local governance through support for the devolution process; capacity building for local institutions; and increasing citizen engagement to ensure local government has the authority, resources, and capacity required to be responsive to its communities, serve their needs, and counter the top-down, overly centralized nature of government. Near-term priorities are the Local

Government Commission, newly elected local officials, and constituency engagement. Mid- to long-term priorities include supporting the training curricula for local officials, constituency engagement, and information on and monitoring of the 2019 local elections.

DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID)’s Center of Excellence on

Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance (DRG Center) in the Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and

Humanitarian Assistance (DCHA/DRG) contracted a Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance (DRG)

Assessment of Guyana. The DRG assessment is intended to assess the political change and democratization in Guyana, consider the U.S. Government’s operational and programmatic environment, and develop strategic and programmatic recommendations to address the core DRG problem(s) identified in the assessment. Currently, USAID/Eastern and Southern Caribbean’s (USAID/ESC) program in

Guyana focuses mainly on supporting the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI). Also presently, a one-year DRG project is supporting voter education for the local elections in March 2016 and dialogue and consensus toward social cohesion at the community level.

The assessment was conducted following the DRG Strategic Assessment Framework (Conducting a

Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance Assessment: A Framework for Strategic Development), or

SAF.4 This framework includes a political economy analysis of a country, leads to program choices, and incorporates lessons from comparative experiences. The framework uses a four-step process to develop a

DRG assistance strategy for a country:

1. Identify the DRG problem through analysis of five key attributes of a democracy (the degree of consensus on rules and fundamentals; the degree to which the rule of law and human rights are respected; the degree of competition and political accountability; the quality of political inclusion;

the level of government responsiveness and effectiveness) and the direction of change on the democratic development continuum.

2. Identify the key actors and institutions that can support or obstruct DRG reforms, and assess the incentives and resources for reforms (political economy analysis).

3. Distill the ideal strategy for assistance from an analytical standpoint, and then determine how USAID can best help to address these problems.

4. Recommend strategy and programming options for USAID that will most effectively address the major DRG problems identified.

The fieldwork for the Guyana DRG assessment was undertaken in November–December 2015 by Sue

Nelson, Team Leader; Dr. Stacey-Ann Wilson, Country Specialist; Dr. Aaron Abbarno, Fellow at

USAID’s DRG Center; Lawrence Lachmansingh, National Expert; and Chloe Noble, USAID/ESC. While in Guyana, the team met with a wide range of political, civil, and international actors (Annex 1) and reviewed relevant documentation and reports related to the state of democratic development and assistance in Guyana (Annex 2). In addition to interviews in the capital Georgetown, part of the team travelled to Annai, Lethem, and Mahdia in Regions 9 and 8, with the other team members travelling to

Linden, Berbice, and Bartica in Regions 10, 5, 6, and 7. In these locations, they met with local and regional government officers, civil society, indigenous villagers, and political actors. Although the team met with a wide range of persons and more than 80 institutions, it is still a very small sample from a large and complex country. Nevertheless, the information provided by the different sources was validated by its

4 USAID. (September 2014). Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance Strategic Assessment Framework.

2 DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA

consistency. Assumptions about broad public sentiment were corroborated by public opinion data from the 2014 AmericasBarometer survey in Guyana where appropriate indicators exist. Similarly, topline governance indicators, such as the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) Scorecard for Guyana, help ground arguments made throughout the report.

1.2 BACKGROUND

Guyana is a diverse nation primarily comprising indigenous peoples and descendants of enslaved

Africans and indentured East Indian laborers. Although located in South America, Guyana is more culturally and politically similar to the English-speaking Caribbean. Guyana is a large country of 83,000 square miles, approximately the size of Idaho, with a low lying coastland, rugged hinterland terrain, wide rivers, savannahs, and rainforests. The country is rich in natural resources, most notably gold, diamond, bauxite, oil, and timber. More than 90 percent of Guyana’s population of 748,000 lives along a narrow strip of coastal area, which is less than 10 percent of the country’s land mass. Vast areas of the country are thus sparsely populated. The capital of Guyana, Georgetown, and other coastal villages and towns are below sea level and prone to flooding. Coastal areas are protected by an elaborate system of sea walls, locks, and drainage canals built originally by the Dutch.

According to the 2002 Guyana Census, the two largest groups are of East Indian descent (Indo-

Guyanese), with approximately 43.5 percent of the population, and of African descent (Afro-Guyanese), with approximately 30.2 percent. Indigenous peoples make up 9.2 percent of the population, with 16.7 percent of the population identifying as mixed heritage. Whites, Portuguese, and Chinese together make up about 0.4 percent of the population.5

Guyana will celebrate its 50th year of independence from Britain in May 2016. Although Guyana looks forward to the future, its present is still marked by the legacies of its past. The split of the People’s

Progressive Party (PPP) into two factions in 1955 and the establishment of the People’s National

Congress (PNC) by PPP co-founder Forbes Burnham in 1957 led to the hardening of political, economic, and social structures along key ethnic lines. PPP co-founder Cheddi Jagan courted and was supported by rural Indo-Guyanese, while Burnham was courted and was supported by Afro-Guyanese. This division led to mistrust between the two main political parties, their leaders, and their constituents, which continues to this day.6

The legacy of these divisions has been de facto one-party rule, first under the PNC, which held power for

26 years following independence in 1966 through an increasingly authoritarian government; then under the PPP/Civic (PPP/C) for more than two decades until the May 2015 elections ushered in a multi-ethnic reformist coalition, which won with a one-seat majority.

Guyana faces a number of social problems. These include high levels of crime and violence; high levels of domestic violence; incidents of violence against transgender individuals; high incidents of trafficking in persons (TIP); and the increasing use of guns, particularly for criminal purposes. Guyana is also a trans-shipment point for drug smuggling from South America to North America, Europe, and West

Africa. There is a disproportionately high suicide rate in Guyana, particularly among Indo-Guyanese and youth. The country also has a high migration rate, with 90 percent of tertiary-level graduates migrating to the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom (UK), and other parts of the Caribbean. While the

Guyanese Diaspora is tremendously important to the country in terms of remittances, the high migration levels have an adverse effect on the society in that it drains the country of intellectual capacity, technical skills, and know-how. The public and private sector also experience high turnover as educated, trained, and capable people find opportunities elsewhere.

5 Guyana Bureau of Statistics, Population and Housing Census, 2012 Preliminary Report.

6 For more information, see Annex 3: Historical Political Development.

DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA 3

Guyana shares borders with Brazil, Suriname, and Venezuela and has land disputes with two of these, due in large part to the wealth and diversity of Guyana’s natural resources. In May 2015, Exxon Mobil announced that it had discovered large oil and gas deposits off the coast of Guyana. This announcement was shortly followed by Venezuela extending its claims beyond the previously decided but still disputed

Essequibo region to include areas of the oil and gas find. The Government of Guyana (GoG) has asked the United Nations (UN) to intervene. For the Suriname-Guyana land dispute in the mineral rich landmass of the Tigri area, a committee was set up in 2011 to negotiate a way forward. These issues are still unresolved, even as Guyana was able to achieve a satisfactory final solution in 2007 to its offshore dispute with Suriname, through the UN Law of the Sea Tribunal.

Guyana’s border with Brazil presents a different set of issues. Social services in Brazil have attracted young Guyanese families near the border, with school-aged children attending schools in Brazil and their mothers collecting the family allowance given by the Brazilian government to poor Brazilian families.7

Favorable foreign exchange rates mean that border towns import commodities cheaply, which weakens local productive capacity, particularly in manufacturing, agriculture, and animal husbandry. However, the exchange rate is good for other types of businesses, such as hotels, grocery stores, wholesale stores, and clothing boutiques.

With reference to Guyana’s rich landscape, there are concerns about sustainable mining, logging, and forest management. There are unresolved issues with respect to Indigenous land rights. The Amerindian

Act of 2006 and the demarcation and communal titling of land to indigenous communities do not give sub-surface rights on those lands. Many indigenous communities have found themselves in disputes with miners who were given permission to mine lands that were eventually titled to indigenous villages. The titling of land to indigenous communities does not nullify previously assigned mining tracts. In addition, there are several instances of indigenous lands being mined without the prior consent or negotiation with indigenous communities. Observers suggest that with the increased availability of guns in Guyana, if regulatory, policy, or constitutional reforms are not made in a timely manner to resolve these issues, this situation could escalate.

The urban-rural divide in Guyana is quite stark: 71.5 percent of the population is rural.8 Rural includes villages along the coast as well as those “scattered deep in the hinterland of the country.”9 While close to

90 percent of the population lives along the coast, the minority of the population, including the majority of the indigenous population, lives in the hinterland areas. Access to social services—such as healthcare and education; public infrastructure; and water, roads, and communications networks—are less accessible and generally are of lower or inconsistent quality in rural areas than in urban areas. Hinterland areas have even less access to sustainable employment opportunities, beyond subsistence agriculture, and residents are less likely to complete secondary education. Schools are poorly resourced and are often available a great distance from “neighboring” villages so that students are required to board. Hinterland residents also have less influence over decision makers in central government, as they are far removed from the centers of power and influence.

Despite the problems and challenges, power brokers in government and civil society still have a great deal of optimism and hope that with the right kinds of initiatives and support, Guyana can overcome.

7 The family allowance (Bolsa Familia), is a cash-transfer welfare program in Brazil aimed at helping poor families. Families with children must ensure their children attend school regularly and get them vaccinated in order to receive the funds.

8 Bureau of Statistics op cit. Data is based on the 2002 Census.

9 Ibid.

4 DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA

2.0 KEY CHALLENGES TO

DEMOCRACY, HUMAN

RIGHTS, AND

GOVERNANCE

This section describes the key challenges to democracy, human rights, and governance in Guyana by focusing on the five analytical elements of consensus, inclusion, rule of law and human rights, competition and political accountability, and government responsiveness and effectiveness. The assessment found problems in all five elements, but the two most critical areas were in political competition and accountability and in governance responsiveness and effectiveness. These affected the issues found in all of the key analytical elements.

TABLE 2.1: KEY ANALYTICAL ELEMENTS OF THE STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK

Consensus: Is there basic consensus on questions of national identity and the fundamental rules of the game, and is the political contest played by those rules?

Inclusion: Are there problems of inclusion or exclusion? Are parts of the population formally excluded and disenfranchised from meaningful political, social, or economic participation? Is participation in political life, economic life, and social life high or low?

Competition and Political Accountability: Is there competition in the system? Are free and fair elections a regular feature of competition? Are there other mechanisms beside elections that ensure the government delivers on its promises and fulfills the public trust? Is there a competition of ideas, a free media, and a vibrant civil society? Is a healthy set of checks and balances present between branches of government or between levels of government?

Rule of Law and Human Rights: Is there ordered liberty? Are political life, economic life, and social life bound by a rule of law? Does the state recognize and protect the rights of its citizens?

Government Responsiveness and Effectiveness: Are public institutions administered effectively?

Do they respond to public needs and provide socially acceptable services? Do robust internal mechanisms exist to hold government institutions accountable and enhance their effectiveness?

2.1 CONSENSUS

While there is a shared political culture and the belief that democracy is the only legitimate form of government, long-standing acrimony between the two dominant political parties has made achieving consensus on policies, committee appointments, and constitutional reform priorities, among other issues, difficult at the national level. However, social capital and the shared desire for change have facilitated consensus building at the regional and local levels.

Basic consensus exists on questions of national identity and the boundaries of the state. There is also consensus on the fundamental rules of the game, although in the past not all political actors play by those rules consistently. Historically, political parties, specifically the PPP/C and the PNC/Reform (PNC/R), DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA 5 have been polarized in terms of ethnic politics and political ideology and priorities, which often makes achieving consensus on policy issues difficult. Even when there is consensus, it can be derailed. For instance, under the previous government, the president would assent to bills in a protracted way or fail to assent to bills passed by the National Assembly. Although there is a shared political culture corresponding to the shared national identity and the belief in the superiority of the democratic form of government for Guyana, there is much disagreement on the best way to function in such an environment.

While consensus at the national level has been difficult, consensus at regional levels has been easier to accomplish. Consensus at the level of Regional Democratic Councils (RDCs) was facilitated by familiarity and based on personal relationships and trust (social capital), rather than political wheeling and dealing. At the local levels/periphery, consensus was made easier by the urgency of wanting change

(improvements) and economic development. The youth and those working on community issues seem far more willing and able to agree, not just on the rules of the game, but the roles to be played.

At the national level, political actors frequently confuse the roles of the party, the government (local and central), and the state. There is a tendency to overstep, confuse, or willfully misrepresent the bounds of each to maintain control. It was noted that more intense divisions were noticeable after the recent elections because politicians, especially the PPP/C, continued to debate and engage in acrimonious exchanges in an effort to maintain power and control, while the public in large part is willing to move on.

This willingness to move on previously presented itself in the lead up to the 2015 elections. During the

November 2014 no-confidence vote standoff in parliament10 and subsequent multi-ethnic protests in the streets, Khemraj Ramjattan (co-founder of the Alliance for Change) saw this as a change in society, a society now willing to move away from race to dealing with issues.11 Then-President Donald Ramotar did not share that view; he saw the stand-off and multi-ethnic protests as a “result of maneuvering by an upstart opposition seeking to gain power.”12

Although there is consensus on the rules and legal equality of access, citizens do not trust government systems and services to work because they are inefficient in delivery and often lack accountability when services are not delivered. A key driver for the lack of national consensus is mistrust among stakeholders—particularly among key actors within the political parties. Since race correlates with parties, an ethno-political dimension to mistrust exists. Guyana’s toxic mix of race and politics encourages a struggle for ethnic dominance as part of the struggle for political office.13 Constitutional and institutional reforms, while necessary, are likely insufficient without trust-building to generate increased consensus.

Considering the consensus crisis Guyana finds itself in all too frequently, there have been numerous calls for power-sharing, shared governance, and government of national unity by local, regional, and international experts and some politicians. Such calls have not been successful to date, in large part because of political mistrust.

2.2 INCLUSION

No ethnic, cultural, or religious group is formally excluded or disenfranchised from participation in the political, economic, or social life of Guyana. The diverse and multicultural nature of Guyana is promoted

10 On November 10, 2014, then-President Donald Ramotar suspended Parliament to stave off a call of no-confidence vote by the

AFC against the government’s spending. The power to prorogue (suspend) parliament up to six months is provided for in Article 70(1) of the constitution.

11 Gupta. (2015). “A multiethnic movement emerges in Guyana to counter politics-as-usual,” The New York Times, January 17, 2015.

12 Ibid.

13 Ramakarran. (2015). “Politics as usual.” The Conversation Tree. September 5, 2015.

6 DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT OF GUYANA

and recognized in Article 35 of the Guyana constitution. However, there is perceived and real ethnic exclusion from the political processes, social discrimination, and de facto exclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) persons. There is also de facto disenfranchisement of indigenous peoples and those who live in the remote hinterlands in terms of access to social services, reliable communication, economic development, and a decent standard of living.

The constitution has fairly progressive clauses calling for the establishment of human rights commissions, and setting out how diverse and inclusive they should be. The constitution also provides for the inclusion of opposition parties on national committees and commissions. It mandates that the president must hold consultations with the leader of the opposition in making key appointments, such as the ombudsman. For the critical appointment of the Chairman of the Elections Commission, there must be agreement between the president and the leader of the opposition. The current constitution does not specifically identify sexual orientation as a basis for non-discrimination and human rights groups in Guyana are working to change that.

Although there is general agreement on the concept that everyone should be treated equally, connections, power relations, and location create inequities that perpetuate a system of patronage, where inclusion and access is often dependent on connection to central power. The urban (coast)-rural (hinterland), center-periphery divide is a crucial factor for inclusion/exclusion in Guyana. As a general rule, the more remote the community, the less access it has to basic services. This is a function of poor/inadequate infrastructure and communication networks and promotes economic under-development and inequality in rural communities. This is most acute for indigenous communities who live primarily in the hinterlands.14 Both the former and current Governments of Guyana focused attention on the inclusion and development of

Guyana’s indigenous populations, now anchored in the Amerindian Act of 2006. However, contentious land rights issues remain unresolved, and the general perception is that indigenous peoples’ views are not considered when decisions are being made about and for them. The roots of social exclusion are also local. Indigenous women are marginalized many times over. As rural citizens, these women lack access to justice and health services. Their socio-economic development is hindered in indigenous communities that are silent about gender-based violence (GBV) and where pernicious norms facilitate early marriage and/or pregnancy that interrupt girls’ schooling. Indigenous women who do not speak English as a first language are more likely to remain taciturn or to convey their beliefs less effectively in women’s advocacy groups. It is worth noting that at least one person noted that indigenous communities are generally tolerant toward LGBTI persons, although they are not openly accepted, and therefore may experience some hardships. While there are different gender norms within all ethnic groups in Guyana, there are no legal barriers to women’s participation in the social, economic, or political life of the country.

Guyana, like the rest of the Caribbean, has championed and actively promotes gender equality and women’s empowerment. Women in Guyana have historically held prominent political and government roles in the country. One of the founding members of the PPP was a woman, Janet Jagan, who also served as President (1997–1999) and then Prime Minister (1999). Guyana is highest-ranked in the Caribbean in terms of women parliamentarians, consistently having over 30 percent female representation in parliament.15 Women are well represented in the public sector, with most of the Ministry’s Permanent

Secretaries being women. Female students also greatly outnumber male students at the tertiary educational level, with more women both enrolling in and completing university than their male counterparts.16 Women are well represented in the professional sectors (law, medicine, finance); private security; and in the informal economy, particularly as street vendors. Women’s participation in the wider

14 The Indigenous peoples date back some 11,000 years. There are nine indigenous Nations identified in Guyana – Akawaio, Arawak, Arekuna, Carib, Macushi (Makushi), Patamona, Wai Wai, Wapichan (Wapishana) and Warrau. While each nation has their own distinctive cultural heritage, language and sometimes religions, they also identify with the Guyanese nationality.

15 http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SG.GEN.PARL.ZS.

16 Government of Guyana, Ministry of Education. http://www.education.gov.gy/web/index.php/downloads/cat_view/8-downloads/60-digest-of-education-statistics.

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SG.GEN.PARL.ZS…