Category:

Diaspora Engagement

Guyana’s New Cabinet: A Public Choice Perspective on an Oil-Fueled Future

by guyanabusinessjournal September 16, 2025

written by guyanabusinessjournal

As Guyana stands on the precipice of unprecedented economic transformation, the recent unveiling of President Irfaan Ali’s new, expanded Cabinet has been met with a mixture of hope and skepticism. The government’s pronouncements of a new era of efficiency, transparency, and results-driven governance resonate with a populace eager for progress. However, a more critical lens, informed by the principles of public choice theory and the cautionary tales of other resource-rich nations, suggests a more complex and potentially perilous path ahead. The very expansion of government, fueled by a torrent of oil revenue, may sow the seeds of the inefficiencies and corruption it purports to eliminate. This article will explore the implications of Guyana’s new political landscape through the lens of public choice theory, analyzing the potential for government expansion to create a dominant state, a dependent economy, and a political class insulated from the demands of its citizenry. While the individual merits of the newly appointed ministers are not in question, the structural incentives created by a larger, wealthier state apparatus warrant a sober and critical examination of the challenges that lie ahead for Guyana.

President Irfaan Ali’s new 25-member Cabinet, sworn in on September 13, 2025, represents a significant expansion of the executive branch, a move the government has framed as essential for managing the country’s burgeoning oil wealth and accelerating its development agenda. The administration has been vocal in its commitment to a new model of governance, one that prioritizes efficiency, accountability, and tangible results for the people of Guyana. In his address to the new ministers, President Ali emphasized that the government would be “results-driven, people-centred and efficient,” and that the public service would be subject to “continuous assessment” to ensure performance and accountability. The President’s rhetoric has been consistently focused on the need for “agility, speed, and relentless hard work” to meet the country’s ambitious development goals.

The new Cabinet, a blend of experienced ministers and new faces, has been presented as a team carefully crafted to deliver on this promise. The expansion includes the creation of new ministries, such as the Ministry of Public Utilities and Aviation, as well as the addition of new portfolios to existing ministries, including the Ministry of Labour, Manpower, and Planning, and the Ministry of Public Service, Government Efficiency, and Implementation. These changes, the government argues, are necessary to manage the complexities of a rapidly growing economy and to ensure that the benefits of the oil boom are distributed across all sectors of society.

The government’s promises of a new era of good governance are intended to reassure a population that has long been plagued by corruption and inefficiency. The President has been clear that there will be no tolerance for corruption or abuse of power, stating that “those who wish to exercise power will find themselves out of a job.” The emphasis on transparency and accountability is a welcome message in a country that has historically struggled with these issues. The government’s commitment to a results-driven agenda, with clear performance metrics, is also a positive step towards a more effective and responsive public sector. However, the very expansion of the state and the massive influx of oil revenue that fuels it create a new set of challenges and risks that cannot be ignored.

The promises of a more efficient and accountable government, while laudable, must be viewed through the skeptical lens of public choice theory. This school of economic thought, pioneered by James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock, applies economic principles to the analysis of political behavior, and its predictions for a country in Guyana’s position are sobering. Public choice theory posits that political actors, like all individuals, are primarily motivated by self-interest. This is not to say that they are inherently corrupt, but rather that their decisions are shaped by the incentives they face. In a political system, these incentives often diverge from the public interest.

The theory identifies several key mechanisms through which this divergence occurs, all of which are highly relevant to Guyana’s current situation. One of the central concepts of public choice theory is “rent-seeking,” the process by which individuals or groups use the political process to secure economic advantages for themselves, rather than creating new wealth. In an oil-rich country like Guyana, the opportunities for rent-seeking are immense. The vast revenues generated by the oil sector create a powerful incentive for individuals and groups to lobby the government for preferential treatment, such as lucrative contracts, subsidies, or protection from competition. This behavior diverts resources away from productive activities and can lead to widespread corruption and inefficiency.

As the government expands, with more ministries, more regulations, and more discretionary power, the opportunities for rent-seeking multiply. The creation of new ministries and the expansion of existing ones, as seen in President Ali’s new Cabinet, creates more gatekeepers and more opportunities for corruption. Another key concept is “bureaucratic inefficiency.” Public choice theorists argue that government bureaucracies, unlike private firms, are not subject to the discipline of the market. They do not face competition, and their performance is not measured by profit and loss. As a result, bureaucrats are often motivated by factors other than efficiency, such as budget maximization, job security, and personal power.

This can lead to bloated, inefficient, and unresponsive government agencies that consume vast resources without delivering commensurate value to the public. The expansion of the Guyanese government, with its new ministries and expanded portfolios, is likely to exacerbate this problem. The influx of oil revenue will enable the government to expand its payroll and programs, but without robust mechanisms for accountability, this expansion is unlikely to result in improved public services.

The theory of the “resource curse” provides a robust framework for understanding the specific challenges faced by oil-rich nations. The resource curse refers to the paradox that countries with an abundance of natural resources, particularly oil, tend to experience slower economic growth, higher levels of corruption, and weaker institutions compared to countries without such resources. The massive influx of oil revenue can distort the economy, leading to a phenomenon known as “Dutch disease,” where the manufacturing and agricultural sectors decline as the currency appreciates and resources are drawn into the oil sector. This creates a dangerous dependency on a single, volatile commodity.

The political consequences of the resource curse are equally pernicious. The availability of significant, unearned revenues from oil can make governments less accountable to their citizens. When governments do not need to tax their citizens to fund their operations, they have less incentive to be responsive to their needs. This can lead to a breakdown in the social contract between the government and the governed, creating fertile ground for authoritarianism and corruption.

The expansion of the Guyanese government, funded by oil revenues, is a classic symptom of the resource curse. The government’s ability to spend lavishly without having to raise taxes will make it less accountable to the public and more susceptible to the temptations of rent-seeking and corruption. The creation of new ministries and the expansion of the public sector will create more opportunities for patronage and political favoritism. The government’s promises of efficiency and accountability, while well-intentioned, are unlikely to be fulfilled in the absence of strong institutional constraints on its power.

The scale of Guyana’s oil-driven economic transformation cannot be overstated. The country’s 2025 budget of US$6.628 billion represents a 21% increase from the 2023 budget of US$5.496 billion, with oil revenue now accounting for 37% of government expenditures. This dependency on oil revenue has grown dramatically in just three years, rising from 23% in 2022 to 29% in 2024, and now to 37% in 2025 – a 14 percentage point increase that signals an accelerating reliance on a single, volatile commodity.

The economic statistics paint a picture of unprecedented growth that would be the envy of any nation. Guyana achieved a remarkable 44% GDP growth in 2024, making it the world’s fastest-growing economy, with the International Monetary Fund projecting a further 14.4% expansion in 2025. This would boost nominal GDP to US$24.5 billion, representing a staggering 410% increase compared to 2018, before the oil boom began. GDP per capita is projected to reach US$30,650.1 in 2025, a figure that would place Guyana among the upper-middle-income countries globally.

However, these impressive macroeconomic indicators mask deeper structural vulnerabilities that public choice theory would predict. The economy has become dangerously concentrated, with mining and quarrying now accounting for 63.4% of GDP, while agriculture has shrunk to just 10.3% and financial intermediation represents 8.6%. This concentration represents a classic case of Dutch disease, where the oil sector crowds out other productive activities, creating a dangerous dependency on a single commodity whose prices are notoriously volatile.

The government’s spending patterns reveal the classic symptoms of resource curse economics. While massive appropriations have been made for health, education, and housing, the government has also implemented populist measures, including one-time cash payments of GY$100,000 to every citizen, free university tuition programs, and minimum wage increases. These measures, while politically popular, represent the kind of unsustainable spending that public choice theory predicts will occur when governments have access to significant, unearned revenues.

The Natural Resource Fund, which receives government revenues from oil, recorded receipts of US$2.57 billion in 2024, and the government expects to receive more than US$12 billion in oil revenues between 2025 and 2028. This massive influx of revenue creates powerful incentives for rent-seeking behavior. It reduces the government’s accountability to its citizens, as it no longer relies primarily on taxation to fund its operations.

The fundamental insight of public choice theory is that the outcomes of government expansion and oil dependency are invariant primarily to the particular choice of ministers. While President Ali has appointed what appears to be a competent and diverse Cabinet, including new faces such as Keoma Griffith as Minister of Labour, Manpower, and Planning, Sarah Browne as Minister of Amerindian Affairs, and Zulfikar Ally as Minister of Public Service, Government Efficiency and Implementation, the structural incentives they face will shape their behavior more than their individual characteristics.

The creation of new ministries and the expansion of existing portfolios may be presented as necessary for managing complexity, but public choice theory suggests that these expansions create their own momentum toward inefficiency and rent-seeking, regardless of who occupies the ministerial positions. The appointment of experienced ministers, such as Ashni Kumar Singh, continuing as Senior Minister for Finance, Vickram Bharrat returning to Natural Resources, and Mohabir Anil Nandlall remaining as Attorney General, provides continuity. However, it also illustrates how the expansion of government creates vested interests in maintaining and growing bureaucratic structures.

Each ministry becomes a constituency for increased spending, more staff, and expanded mandates. The ministers, however well-intentioned, face powerful incentives to maximize their budgets and expand their influence, as this is how success is often measured in government. The bureaucrats who work under them have similar incentives to grow their departments and secure their positions. These incentives operate independently of the personal integrity or competence of the individuals involved.

The expansion from a smaller Cabinet to a 25-member Cabinet creates more centers of power, more opportunities for inter-ministerial competition for resources, and more potential points of capture by special interests. The creation of the Ministry of Public Service, Government Efficiency and Implementation is particularly ironic from a public choice perspective, as it represents the classic bureaucratic response to inefficiency: creating another layer of bureaucracy to monitor and improve the existing bureaucracy.

While Minister Ally may be highly competent and committed to efficiency, the ministry he heads will inevitably develop its own institutional interests and will face the same incentives toward budget maximization and empire-building that affect all government agencies. The fundamental problem is not the quality of the people in government, but the structure of incentives they face. In a system where success is measured by the size of one’s budget rather than the efficiency of service delivery, where there is no competitive pressure to improve performance, and where the ultimate source of funding is not the voluntary contributions of satisfied customers but the coercive power of the state to extract resources from oil revenues, the predictable result is inefficiency, waste, and corruption.

These outcomes are not the result of moral failings on the part of government officials, but the inevitable consequence of the institutional framework within which they operate. Despite these sobering predictions from public choice theory, Guyana’s future is not predetermined. Countries such as Norway, Chile, and Botswana have mitigated the worst effects of the resource curse by implementing robust institutional frameworks that constrain government behavior and promote accountability. The key is to recognize that good intentions and competent personnel are not sufficient; what is needed are institutional mechanisms that align the incentives of government officials with the public interest.

Several specific reforms could help Guyana avoid the pitfalls that have befallen other oil-rich nations. First, the establishment of truly independent oversight institutions with the power to monitor government spending and hold officials accountable for their performance could help counteract the tendency toward waste and corruption. Second, implementing transparent budget processes that require public justification for all expenditures could help ensure that oil revenues are used for productive purposes rather than political patronage.

Third, the creation of constitutional limits on government spending and debt could help prevent the boom-bust cycles that have plagued other resource-rich countries. Fourth, the establishment of a truly independent sovereign wealth fund, managed by professionals rather than politicians, could help ensure that oil revenues are saved for future generations rather than squandered on current consumption.

The challenge for Guyana is that these reforms must be implemented by the very government officials who would be constrained by them. This creates a classic collective action problem: while everyone would benefit from good governance, those in power have strong incentives to resist constraints on their authority. The solution requires a combination of domestic pressure from civil society and international pressure from donors and investors who can make continued support conditional on governance reforms.

The international community, including multilateral institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, has a crucial role to play in supporting Guyana’s efforts to build strong institutions. However, their track record in this regard is mixed, as they often prioritize short-term economic growth over long-term institutional development. The ultimate responsibility lies with the Guyanese people themselves, who must demand accountability from their government and resist the temptation to support politicians who promise unsustainable benefits funded by oil revenues.

The expansion of Guyana’s Cabinet and the significant increase in government spending, funded by oil revenues, represent a critical test of the country’s democratic institutions. The predictions of public choice theory suggest that without strong institutional constraints, this expansion will lead to inefficiency, corruption, and economic distortion, regardless of the personal qualities of the ministers involved. The challenge for Guyana is to prove these predictions wrong by building institutions that can harness the country’s oil wealth for the benefit of all its citizens.

The stakes could not be higher, as the decisions made in the coming years will determine whether Guyana becomes a prosperous, well-governed democracy or another cautionary tale of squandered resource wealth. The path forward requires not just good intentions and competent leadership, but a fundamental commitment to institutional reform that constrains government power and promotes accountability. Only by understanding and addressing the structural incentives identified by public choice theory can Guyana hope to avoid the resource curse and build a sustainable, prosperous future for all its people.

References

“President Ali sets results-driven agenda as the new Cabinet is sworn in,” News Room Guyana, September 13, 2025, https://newsroom.gy/2025/09/13/president-ali-sets-results-driven-agenda-as-the-new-cabinet-is-sworn-in/.

“Twenty-five ministers sworn in,” Stabroek News, September 14, 2025, https://www.stabroeknews.com/2025/09/14/news/guyana/twenty-five-ministers-sworn-in/.

“Public Choice Theory,” Umbrex, accessed September 14, 2025, https://umbrex.com/resources/tools-for-thinking/what-is-public-choice-theory/.

“The Resource Curse,” Natural Resource Governance Institute, March 2015, https://resourcegovernance.org/sites/default/files/nrgi_Resource-Curse.pdf.

“Oil revenue to fund 37% of Guyana’s US$6.6 billion 2025 budget,” OilNOW, January 18, 2025, https://oilnow.gy/news/oil-revenue-to-fund-37-of-guyanas-us6-6-billion-2025-budget/.

“Guyana: A 2025 Snapshot,” Americas Quarterly, January 14, 2025, https://americasquarterly.org/article/guyana-a-2025-snapshot/.

“Oil output, exports drove Guyana economy’s growth of 43.6% in 2024,” Reuters, January 17, 2025, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/oil-output-exports-drove-guyana-economys-growth-436-2024-2025-01-17/.

“Guyana Budget 2024_Summary of Fiscal Measures,” EY, January 17, 2025, https://www.ey.com/content/dam/ey-unified-site/ey-com/en-gy/documents/ey-gy-executive-summary-budget-2025-20250117.pdf.

“Guyana: 2025 Article IV Consultation-Press Release,” International Monetary Fund, May 7, 2025, https://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/002/2025/103/article-A001-en.xml.

“Economy of Guyana,” Wikipedia, December 20, 2024, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Guyana.

“Guyana leads in economic growth amid expanding oil infrastructure boom,” Department of Public Information, May 8, 2025, https://dpi.gov.gy/guyana-leads-in-economic-growth-amid-expanding-oil-infrastructure-boom/.

“GUYANA’S $100k PAYOUT: Is the Initiative Sustainable for the Newfound Oil-Rich State,” Seton Hall Journal of Diplomacy, March 16, 2025, https://blogs.shu.edu/journalofdiplomacy/2025/03/guyanas-100k-payout-is-the-initiative-sustainable-for-the-newfound-oil-rich-state/.

“The Divergent Oil Economies of Guyana and South Sudan,” International Policy Digest, April 12, 2025, https://intpolicydigest.org/when-growth-misleads-the-divergent-oil-economies-of-guyana-and-south-sudan/.

“Guyana’s Oil Boom: How It’s Reshaping Election Politics,” Discovery Alert, August 29, 2025, https://discoveryalert.com.au/news/oil-transformed-guyanas-economy-2025/.

“Guyana anticipates more than US$12 billion in oil revenues in four years,” Caribbean News Global, January 26, 2025, https://caribbeannewsglobal.com/guyana-anticipates-more-than-us12-billion-in-oil-revenues-in-four-years/.

“Guyana has received more than US$5 billion in revenue since first oil,” OilNOW, October 23, 2024, https://oilnow.gy/featured/guyana-has-received-more-than-us5-billion-in-revenue-since-first-oil/.

“US$6.6bn National Budget tabled in Guyana,” Caribbean Council, January 24, 2025, https://www.caribbean-council.org/us6-6bn-national-budget-tabled-in-guyana/.

Guyana Business Journal

September 16, 2025

Support Independent Analysis

The Guyana Business Journal is committed to delivering thoughtful, data-driven insights on the most critical issues shaping Guyana’s future—from oil and gas to climate change, governance, and development. We invite you to support us if you value and believe in the importance of independent Guyanese-led analysis. Your contributions help us sustain rigorous research, expand access, and amplify the voices of informed individuals across the Caribbean and the diaspora.

The Guyana Business Journal Editorial Board welcomes reflections and submissions at terrence.blackman@guyanabusinessjournal.com.

📢 Please support the Guyana Business Journal & Magazine today

September 16, 2025 1 comment

The PPP/C Government of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana

by guyanabusinessjournal September 14, 2025

written by guyanabusinessjournal

As of September 13, 2025, the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) holds executive authority in the Cooperative Republic of Guyana, led by President Irfaan Ali, Prime Minister Brigadier Mark Phillips, and Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo. The administration is supported by a Cabinet of Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries, and Members of Parliament, who are responsible for governing the country across multiple sectors.

Executive Leadership

President Irfaan Ali – Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces
Prime Minister Brigadier Mark Phillips
Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo

Cabinet of Ministers

Mohabir Anil Nandlall – Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs
Gail Teixeira – Minister of Parliamentary Affairs and Governance
Dr. Ashni Singh – Minister of Finance
Hugh Todd – Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation
Priya Manickchand – Minister of Local Government & Regional Development
Pauline Sukhai – Minister in the Ministry of Local Government
Oneidge Walrond – Minister of Home Affairs
Sonia Parag – Minister of Education
Zulfikar Mustapha – Minister of Agriculture
Dr. Frank Anthony – Minister of Health
Juan Edghill – Minister of Public Works
Deodat Indar – Minister of Public Utilities and Aviation
Zulfikar Ally – Minister of Public Service and Government Efficiency
Susan Rodrigues – Minister of Tourism, Industry & Commerce
Sarah Browne – Minister of Amerindian Affairs
Kwame McCoy – Minister in the Office of the Prime Minister
Keoma Griffith – Minister of Labour and Manpower Planning
Charles Ramson – Minister of Culture, Youth and Sports
Vickram Bharrat – Minister of Natural Resources
Collin Croal – Minister of Housing
Dr. Vindhya Persaud – Minister of Human Services & Social Security
Vikash Ramkissoon – Minister within the Ministry of Agriculture
Ricky Ramraj – Minister within the Ministry of Public Service
Steven Jacobs – Minister within the Ministry of Culture, Youth & Sport
Vanessa Benn – Minister in the Ministry of Housing

Members of Parliament

James Bond
Zamal Hussain
Peter Ramsaroop
Anand Persaud
Seepaul Narine
Bhagmattie Singh
Vishwa Mahadeo
Sanjeev Datadin
Alistair Charlie
Mishcka Griffith
Thandi Macallister
Suresh Singh
Lennox Shuman

The composition of the government reflects the PPP/C’s parliamentary majority and its approach to governance through a wide distribution of ministerial portfolios. The administration’s responsibilities cover finance, foreign relations, natural resources, infrastructure, health, education, housing, agriculture, and social services, among other areas.

This administration now bears the responsibility of translating oil wealth into meaningful development, ensuring that prosperity reaches every Guyanese household. The inclusion of ministers from diverse backgrounds, alongside a parliamentary team that represents voices across the country, signals an ambition to move beyond narrow partisanship toward a broader vision of national growth.

At the Guyana Business Journal, we believe this moment calls for governance rooted in accountability, transparency, and innovation. It is our hope that the PPP/C leadership will rise to this historic occasion, delivering policies that secure Guyana’s long-term prosperity while strengthening the democratic and social fabric of the nation.

Guyana Business Journal

September 14, 2025

Support Independent Analysis

The Guyana Business Journal Editorial Board welcomes reflections and submissions at terrence.blackman@guyanabusinessjournal.com.

📢 Please support the Guyana Business Journal & Magazine today

September 14, 2025 0 comments

Amanza Walton-Desir and the Forward Guyana Movement: A New Chapter in Guyanese Politics

by guyanabusinessjournal September 13, 2025

written by guyanabusinessjournal

The September 1, 2025, Guyanese general election delivered a historic result. While the incumbent People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) secured a decisive majority with 36 seats, the most significant breakthrough came from an unexpected source: the Forward Guyana Movement (FGM), led by Amanza Walton-Desir, which captured a single parliamentary seat just months after its formation.

The FGM’s success marks the first time a small political party led by a woman has achieved parliamentary representation in modern Guyana’s political history. This achievement, while numerically modest, represents a significant crack in the country’s entrenched two-party system and establishes a new voice in the National Assembly.

The FGM emerged from a coalition agreement signed on July 1, 2025, uniting Forward Guyana, The People’s Movement, and the Vigilant Political Action Committee under Walton-Desir’s leadership. The party’s rapid rise—from formation to parliamentary success in just two months—demonstrates both the effectiveness of its grassroots campaign and growing voter appetite for political alternatives.

Born December 6, 1979, in East Berbice-Corentyne, Amanza Walton-Desir brings over two decades of public service experience to her political leadership. Her parents, Ovid and Joy Walton, were both actively involved with the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR), providing her early exposure to political life. Her educational credentials are substantial, having graduated from MacKenzie High School (1995) and President’s College (1997), before earning a Bachelor of Laws with Honours from the University of Guyana and admission to the Guyana Bar in 2003. She later obtained a Master of Laws (LLM) from the International Maritime Law Institute, specializing in aviation and maritime law, and received additional training from the Singapore Aviation Academy and Thunderbird School of Global Management.

Her professional trajectory includes serving as Special Assistant to the Prime Minister (2005-2010), Legal Advisor to the Ministry of Public Works (2010), and General Counsel of the Guyana Civil Aviation Authority (2013-2020). Her work with Parliamentarians for Global Action as a Board Member provided an international perspective on human rights and international law. Walton-Desir entered Parliament in 2020 as a PNCR member, serving as Shadow Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation. However, growing frustration with the established political order led to her resignation from the PNCR in June 2025, setting the stage for the creation of the Forward Guyana Movement.

Walton-Desir’s departure from the PNCR came after what she described as being “undervalued” and “silenced” within the party structure, despite seeking clarity on her role in the upcoming election campaign. At an emotional press conference in June 2025, she announced the formation of Forward Guyana, emphasizing it would be built on “values, clarity, and conviction.” The formal coalition agreement creating the Forward Guyana Movement was signed on July 1, 2025, bringing together three parties under unified leadership.

The movement adopted the wheel as its symbol, representing progress and unity, with purple signifying integrity, dignity, and vision. The FGM’s platform centers on five pillars: people, environment, sovereignty, governance, and economy. Their campaign message, “Real Change Can’t Wait,” resonated with voters seeking alternatives to traditional party politics. The movement emphasizes “service over status, people over politics, and country over convenience.”

Despite limited resources compared to established parties, the FGM conducted an effective grassroots campaign, reaching communities from Georgetown to remote hinterland areas. Rather than engaging in what Walton-Desir called a “bidding war” of promises, the movement focused on sustainable, long-term development strategies.

The FGM’s parliamentary success represents a significant historical achievement in Guyanese politics. This marks the first time a small political party led by a woman has successfully secured parliamentary representation in modern Guyana. While women have held prominent positions in Guyanese politics, the context differs significantly from Walton-Desir’s achievement. Janet Jagan, who became Guyana’s first female President and Prime Minister in 1997, led the established People’s Progressive Party, which she had co-founded with her husband Cheddi Jagan decades earlier. Janet Jagan’s path to power utilized the existing party infrastructure built over decades, which was fundamentally different from creating an independent small party and achieving electoral success within months.

Research into Guyana’s political history reveals no comparable precedent of a woman leading a small, independent political party from formation to parliamentary representation. Previous women’s political participation typically occurred within established party structures or as part of larger political movements, rather than as leaders of independent, small parties that broke electoral thresholds.

The final election results confirmed the FGM’s historic achievement: PPP/C won 36 seats, the newly formed We Invest in Nationhood took 16 seats, APNU secured 12 seats, and the Forward Guyana Movement claimed the remaining seat. Walton-Desir views the single seat not as a limitation but as an opportunity for focused representation, stating: “One seat may be small, but it represents thousands of voices who believe in fairness and dignity.” The party has committed to “constructive engagement” in Parliament, supporting beneficial policies while holding the government accountable.

The FGM’s success potentially reshapes Guyana’s political dynamics in several ways. The movement provides an independent perspective unbeholden to traditional party loyalties, potentially elevating political discourse beyond partisan divisions. The FGM’s breakthrough may encourage other new political movements, creating a more diverse and competitive political landscape. Walton-Desir represents a new generation of political leadership, demonstrating that challenging the established two-party dominance is achievable with proper organization and a clear message.

The FGM faces significant challenges as a single-seat party in a system dominated by larger political forces. However, Walton-Desir emphasizes the party’s commitment to amplifying citizen concerns and building bridges with others serious about change. The movement’s rapid trajectory—from its formation on July 1 to its electoral success on September 1—demonstrates the potential for new political forces to emerge and gain traction in Guyana’s evolving democracy.

The Forward Guyana Movement’s achievement extends beyond electoral politics. It represents proof that political innovation is possible in Guyana, that new voices can break through established barriers, and that voters are willing to support alternatives to traditional party choices. For a country managing unprecedented oil wealth while facing regional challenges, this injection of new political thinking may prove valuable for national development. Walton-Desir’s journey from PNCR resignation to parliamentary representation exemplifies the possibilities that arise when a political vision meets determined organizing. The single seat won by the Forward Guyana Movement carries symbolic weight far beyond its numerical value—it signals that Guyana’s political future need not be confined to its political past.

Guyana Business Journal

September 13, 2025

Support Independent Analysis

The Guyana Business Journal Editorial Board welcomes reflections and submissions at terrence.blackman@guyanabusinessjournal.com.

📢 Please support the Guyana Business Journal & Magazine today

September 13, 2025 0 comments

APNU in a Moment of Reckoning: From Storied Legacy to Future Renewal

by guyanabusinessjournal September 7, 2025

written by guyanabusinessjournal

The People’s National Congress (PNC), now operating within the framework of A Partnership for National Unity (APNU), has been one of the great pillars of modern Guyanese politics. From its founding under Forbes Burnham, through the decades of nation-building and the difficult years of economic transition, to its later role as the central force of coalition politics, the PNC/APNU has been deeply intertwined with the shaping of the Guyanese state. It has presided over moments of both triumph and turmoil—guiding Guyana through independence, establishing key state institutions, and fostering early efforts at national integration. For many, its legacy is inseparable from the narrative of Guyana’s emergence on the world stage.

APNU’s contributions to the development of Guyana cannot be discounted. From its emphasis on education and public service to infrastructural projects and diplomatic stewardship during critical regional disputes, the party has played a role in defining Guyana’s political and economic identity. The PNC-led governments of earlier decades, despite their controversies, cultivated a sense of national sovereignty, invested in cultural affirmation, and sought to chart an independent path in the wider Caribbean and global community. More recently, APNU, as part of the coalition government from 2015–2020, presided over the discovery of Guyana’s transformative oil reserves and established the early legal and institutional framework for managing petroleum wealth.

Yet the 2025 general and regional elections have left APNU at its weakest point in half a century. Reduced from 31 seats to just 12, and displaced by the newly formed WIN party as the official opposition, APNU now faces an existential question: how can a movement with such a storied history regain relevance in a rapidly changing Guyana?

The first step is honest reckoning. The election results reflect not just the strength of the PPP/C or the novelty of WIN, but also the electorate’s disillusionment with APNU’s capacity to renew itself. Traditional strongholds faltered; younger voters sought alternatives; and the party’s message struggled to resonate in an era defined by oil wealth and widening inequality. The people of Guyana, while respecting history, are demanding a new political vocabulary—one rooted in accountability, inclusivity, and practical solutions to poverty, unemployment, and corruption.

APNU must therefore pursue a deliberate program of reform and renewal. This begins with leadership introspection. The calls from within for generational change, particularly among youth activists, cannot be ignored. Renewal at the top, coupled with the empowerment of grassroots voices, is essential if APNU is to reconnect with the aspirations of younger Guyanese and urban professionals who are increasingly disengaged from the party’s current posture.

Equally important is the need for policy clarity. APNU must return to its strengths as a movement that once championed self-reliance, social equity, and national pride, but it must adapt those ideals to the realities of the oil era. This entails presenting detailed, credible proposals for diversifying the economy, strengthening democratic institutions, and ensuring that oil wealth is shared equitably. It means moving beyond rhetoric to concrete solutions for education reform, agricultural revitalization, and small business development.

APNU should also embrace its parliamentary role with vigor. Even with a diminished caucus, the party has an opportunity to become the conscience of Parliament—relentlessly demanding transparency in the management of the Natural Resource Fund, exposing inefficiencies, and proposing constructive amendments to government policy. By positioning itself as a principled watchdog rather than a partisan spoiler, APNU can rebuild credibility with citizens who yearn for effective oversight.

Finally, the party must not cede the future to either the PPP/C or WIN. The volatility of Guyana’s political environment means that new alignments are possible, but APNU must be careful to avoid becoming a satellite to others. Instead, it should focus on rebuilding from the ground up: conducting listening tours in villages, forming partnerships with civil society, empowering women and youth leaders, and developing a clear and compelling narrative about the kind of Guyana it wants to build over the next decade.

APNU’s history is one of resilience. It has survived loss, exile from power, and internal schism, yet it has always found a way back into the national conversation. The 2025 defeat is severe, but it need not be terminal. If APNU can harness its legacy while embracing reform, it can re-emerge not only as a viable opposition but as a constructive partner in shaping Guyana’s future.

This moment calls for courage, humility, and vision. Guyana cannot afford a weakened, fractured opposition. Democracy thrives only when those who hold power are subject to rigorous, credible scrutiny. The task before APNU is to once again rise to this responsibility, renew its relevance, and transform its storied history into a platform for future leadership.

The crossroads at which APNU now stands is as consequential as the one facing Guyana itself. Both parties and the nation must decide whether they will cling to old habits or embrace renewal. For APNU, as for Guyana, the time to choose is now.

Guyana Business Journal Editorial Board

September 7, 2025

Support Independent Analysis

The Guyana Business Journal Editorial Board welcomes reflections and submissions at terrence.blackman@guyanabusinessjournal.com.

📢 Please support the Guyana Business Journal & Magazine today

September 7, 2025 1 comment

Guyana’s New Era: Wealth, Unity, and the Test of Leadership

by guyanabusinessjournal September 7, 2025

written by guyanabusinessjournal

The dust has settled on Guyana’s 2025 general and regional elections. President Irfaan Ali and the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) have won decisively. Yet the true meaning of this moment lies beyond the numbers. Guyana now stands at a crossroads, armed with staggering oil wealth but still shackled by poverty, corruption, and division. The rise of the We Invest in Nationhood (WIN) party shows that Guyanese voters are restless, impatient, and ready to upend old certainties. This is not a time for complacent victory laps or bitter recriminations. It is a call to action—an urgent demand for leadership that can finally deliver unity and inclusive prosperity.

The verdict of the people was clear. The PPP/C claimed 36 seats and more than 55 percent of the popular vote, consolidating power and capturing Region Four for the first time in history. But the real earthquake came from WIN. Barely three months old, the party stormed to 16 seats and nearly a quarter of the national vote, displacing A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) as the main opposition. APNU collapsed to 12 seats, the Alliance for Change vanished altogether, and the old political duopoly crumbled overnight. WIN’s victory in Upper Demerara-Berbice, long a PNCR bastion, sent a shockwave through Guyanese politics: the people will no longer be bound by inherited loyalties. They want alternatives. They want accountability. They want something new.

This hunger for change collides with the paradox of plenty. Since 2019, Guyana has earned over $7.5 billion in oil revenues, quadrupling the state budget and catapulting the country into global headlines as the fastest-growing economy in the world. New schools, hospitals, and free tertiary education are real gains. But almost 50 percent of Guyanese still live in poverty. The wealth pouring in is not reaching those who need it most. Corruption, inefficiency, and weak safety nets are bleeding away the promise of oil. The risk of Dutch disease grows as agriculture, manufacturing, and other sectors stagnate. And looming over it all is Venezuela’s aggression: laws annexing Essequibo, armed confrontations on the water, and threats to the very territory that underpins Guyana’s oil future.

The stakes could not be higher. The old politics of ethnic division and zero-sum competition cannot withstand this pressure. Without change, oil will deepen inequality, fuel unrest, and hollow out democracy. With change, Guyana can become a model for how resource wealth transforms a society. The 2025 results show that voters are willing to break with the past. They are signaling, loudly, that leadership must rise to the occasion.

That means more than managing revenues. It means building a new social contract that prioritizes national interest over partisan interests. Transparency and accountability must be non-negotiable. Oversight of oil revenues must be independent and ironclad. Economic diversification cannot be postponed. Investments in education, culture, and community must actively dismantle ethnic barriers and build a shared national identity. And democratic institutions—from the election system to the free press—must be strengthened, not manipulated.

President Ali has the mandate and the opportunity to lead this transformation. WIN has injected urgency and unpredictability into the political arena. The collapse of APNU and the AFC leaves space for genuine renewal. But time is short, and the window is narrow. Opportunity without courage will mean failure.

The world is watching. Guyana can become a beacon of inclusive development, or it can join the long, tragic list of oil-rich nations that their own leaders have betrayed. The choice is stark, and it must be made now. The 2025 election is not the end of a contest but the beginning of a reckoning. The mandate belongs not only to the victors but to the entire nation. Guyana must act—decisively, transparently, and together—to claim the future it deserves.

The hour has come. There is no time to waste.

Guyana Business Journal Editorial Board

September 7, 2025

Support Independent Analysis

The Guyana Business Journal Editorial Board welcomes reflections and submissions at terrence.blackman@guyanabusinessjournal.com.

📢 Please support the Guyana Business Journal & Magazine today

September 7, 2025 0 comments

Region 4, 2020→2025: Do the Numbers Add Up?

by guyanabusinessjournal September 4, 2025

written by guyanabusinessjournal

Region 4, 2020→2025: Do the Numbers Add Up?

By Guyana Business Journal (GBJ) Analysis Desk

What This Report Does

This report looks at the official Region 4 election numbers from 2020 and 2025. Using simple mathematics, we test whether normal turnout shifts can explain the changes in votes, or whether the results show unusual patterns that deserve closer scrutiny.

The idea is straightforward:

If fewer people vote, each party usually loses votes in proportion to its past strength.
We compare what should have happened under this assumption to what actually happened in 2025.
We then measure how far the 2025 results diverge from that baseline, and whether the gaps are small (normal variation) or very large (suspicious).

The Numbers

Turnout fell by 21,533 voters (−10.6%).
PPP nevertheless gained 6,616 votes (+8.2%).
The opposition lost 26,613 votes (−22.8%).
PPP ended up with 15,168 more votes than expected if abstentions were proportional.
The opposition fell 14,254 below expectations.
These two figures almost cancel each other out — PPP’s unexplained gain mirrors the opposition’s unexplained loss.

Why is it Statistically Unusual?

Counter-cyclical growth: PPP grew even as turnout shrank — the opposite of what normally happens.
Mirror-image shifts: PPP’s gains almost exactly match the opposition’s losses, as if votes were directly reallocated.
Outlier status: Statistical tests show the PPP surge is far beyond what random variation can explain.
Improbable abstention pattern: Over 70% of the turnout decline would have to be concentrated among opposition voters alone — highly unlikely in real-world elections.

What does this mean?

These patterns do not prove fraud. But they match the kinds of statistical fingerprints seen in elections internationally, where manipulation was later confirmed.

The Region 4 2025 results are mathematically possible — but statistically implausible. They demand verification, recounts, and independent forensic audits before they can be accepted with confidence.

Why Transparency Matters?

Unexpected outcomes are not automatically illegitimate. But when the math looks this unusual, transparency is the only way to preserve public trust. Publishing Statements of Poll, conducting risk-limiting audits, and involving international observers are not partisan demands — they are basic safeguards for Guyana’s democracy.

⚖️ The GBJ will continue to provide data-driven analysis of Guyana’s elections, economy, and governance — ensuring public debate is guided by evidence, not speculation.

September 4, 2025 0 comments

Guyana at the Crossroads: Beyond Tribalism Toward Competence

by guyanabusinessjournal August 31, 2025

written by guyanabusinessjournal

On September 1, 2025, Guyana goes to the polls. We do so at a moment of profound possibility and grave peril.

In her essay The Trouble with Tribes, Susan Fowler describes the Troxler effect: fix your gaze on a single red dot, and the surrounding blue circle disappears. Focus long enough, and everything beyond the dot fades away. This is the trap of tribalism. When we see only what benefits our group, we lose sight of the larger community. In Guyana, this narrowing of vision has already begun to unravel our families, our institutions, and our national fabric.

Guyana now sits atop an estimated eleven billion oil-equivalent barrels in the Stabroek Block. By year’s end, the Natural Resource Fund is projected to hold more than US $3 billion.

This wealth is not the property of one tribe, one party, or one government. It is the inheritance of every Guyanese citizen—a patrimony to be shared equitably.

The fundamental questions before us are clear:

How can Guyana’s energy resources be best used to improve lives and transform the country and region?

And how can we channel oil revenues into education, infrastructure, and public services while avoiding the failures of other petrostates?

These are not partisan questions.

They are national questions that demand open, rational, and independent dialogue.

In the Gospel of Luke (14:1, 7–14), Jesus, observing how guests scramble for places of honor, cautions: “When you are invited, do not sit down at the place of honor… For all who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted. Instead, when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you.”

This parable strikes at the heart of Guyana’s political moment. Our oil wealth is the banquet. The temptation of our leaders is to seize the highest seat for their tribe, to distribute privilege only among loyalists, and to measure success in the currency of exclusion. But the Gospel calls us to humility and generosity: to widen the table, to invite those left outside, and to make belonging—not advantage—the true measure of leadership.

For too long, Guyanese politics has been trapped in the Machiavellian logic that “it is better to be feared than loved.” Yet even Machiavelli himself reminded leaders that the strongest fortress is the affection of the people. Fear divides. Affection builds.

Tomorrow, we must demand leaders who seek not just the loyalty of their tribe but also the affection of the Guyanese people as a whole. The psychological needs of choice, connection, and competence are real. Tribal identity gives us belonging. But belonging should not mean exclusion. Our leaders must resist the logic of “us versus them” and instead create the conditions for collaboration across our many tribes. Malaysia and Singapore show us that multiethnic governance is possible. Guyana must adapt such lessons to our own history and circumstances.

To envision Guyana as a single, multiracial, multiethnic tribe is not naïve—it is necessary. Competence, not ethnicity, must guide education, housing, and political priorities. The Sovereign Wealth Fund must become a forum for all Guyanese voices. As Guyana votes, the GBJ calls on every citizen and every leader to look beyond the red dot of tribal interest and toward the circle of national unity. Let us remember the wisdom of Luke: that the true measure of leadership is not who sits at the head table but who ensures that the poor, the marginalized, and the voiceless are welcomed into the feast.

Tomorrow, let us vote not as divided tribes but as one Guyanese people.

Read the original 2021 essay here

Guyana Business Journal

August 31, 2025

Support Independent Analysis

The Guyana Business Journal Editorial Board welcomes reflections and submissions at terrence.blackman@guyanabusinessjournal.com.

📢 Please support the Guyana Business Journal & Magazine today

August 31, 2025 0 comments

Cuffy Was No “House Slave”

by guyanabusinessjournal August 30, 2025

written by guyanabusinessjournal

When Attorney General Anil Nandlall recently referred to Cuffy, leader of the 1763 Berbice Rebellion, as a “proud and upstanding house slave,” he did more than misspeak. He diminished one of the most significant figures in the history of Black resistance in the Americas. At best, it was an unfortunate choice of words. At worst, it was a distortion of history that risks trivializing the sacrifices of thousands who fought and died for freedom on Guyanese soil.

The historical record tells a different story. In her prize-winning book, Blood on the River: A Chronicle of Mutiny and Freedom on the Wild Coast (2020), historian Marjoleine Kars reconstructs the Berbice rebellion in unprecedented detail. Drawing on newly discovered Dutch archives—especially the testimonies of enslaved men and women—Kars demonstrates that Cuffy was no servant to colonial masters. He was a revolutionary, an early leader of one of the largest and longest-lasting slave uprisings in Caribbean history.

In February 1763, Cuffy and his comrades rose against Dutch planters. They overran plantations, seized arms, and gained control of much of the colony. For more than a year, Berbice was engulfed in a struggle between the enslaved majority and the Dutch colonial regime. Cuffy sought to lead that struggle, organizing negotiations with the Dutch and attempting to chart a sustainable future for the enslaved. His letters, preserved in colonial archives, show not servility but strategy—a man navigating war, internal divisions, and the staggering brutality of a slave society.

To call such a leader a “house slave” is to erase both the scale of the uprising and the vision of freedom that animated it. Cuffy was not perfect—Kars’ book makes clear that tensions among the rebels were fierce. There were disagreements between African-born and Creole enslaved, between those who wanted negotiation and those who demanded total war. In the end, Cuffy himself was overtaken by rivals within the rebellion. But to reduce him to a caricature is to misunderstand the very essence of the Berbice uprising.

That essence was nothing less than a collective cry for liberty. Hundreds of enslaved Africans died in the fighting; many more were executed after the rebellion collapsed. They were not house servants. They were freedom fighters. Their rebellion was one of the most remarkable in the hemisphere before Haiti. And their memory remains a living resource for a Guyana still struggling with questions of justice, equity, and national identity.

Words matter. When leaders mischaracterize Cuffy, they do more than injure historical accuracy. They erode the dignity of Guyana’s past and the meaning of its struggles. We cannot afford to be careless with our heroes. The memory of the enslaved is fragile; too often, their voices were silenced in life and erased in death. To honor them requires precision, respect, and a genuine sense of humility.

Cuffy was not a house slave. He was a revolutionary. He symbolizes the refusal of Black people in Guyana to accept servitude as destiny. His story, as Kars shows, is complex, human, and imperfect—but it is also inspiring. It belongs not to colonial caricature but to a long tradition of resistance that still resonates today.

As Guyana navigates the promises and perils of oil wealth, as we debate equity and governance, the lessons of Cuffy and his comrades should weigh heavily on us. They remind us that freedom is never granted—it is fought for, and it is sustained only when justice stands at the center of national life.

Let us then speak of Cuffy with the reverence his memory demands. He was not a “house slave.” He was a leader, a revolutionary, and a symbol of resistance whose spirit still calls us to dignity and justice.

Please view an interview with Marjoleine Kars here

Guyana Business Journal

August 30, 2025

Support Independent Analysis

The Guyana Business Journal Editorial Board welcomes reflections and submissions at terrence.blackman@guyanabusinessjournal.com.

📢 Please support the Guyana Business Journal & Magazine today

August 30, 2025 2 comments

Editorial | Guyana Business Journal

by guyanabusinessjournal August 30, 2025

written by guyanabusinessjournal

At the Guyana Business Journal, our mission extends beyond mere commentary—we champion rigorously researched data-driven analysis that informs policy for a prosperous, inclusive, and democratic Guyana.

In this spirit, we offer this endorsement not as partisan advocacy but as an urgent call for leadership anchored in equity, national unity, and transformative economic justice at the most consequential moment in our nation’s history.

As Guyana experiences an unprecedented oil boom—with production reaching 650,000 barrels per day in 2024 and projected to exceed 1.3 million barrels per day by 2027—we stand at a crossroads that will define our national character for generations. With over $12 billion in oil revenues projected for 2025–2028 alone, and our nation now ranking among the world’s highest in per-capita oil reserves, the fundamental question is not how much wealth we can generate, but whether we possess the moral courage to share it justly.

The stakes could not be higher.

Will the benefits of this historic windfall cascade through every village, hinterland community, and urban ward, lifting those who have waited centuries for their fair share?

Or will they pool in familiar corridors of privilege, perpetuating the very inequalities that have scarred our society since colonial times?

Will emancipation’s unfinished promise and independence’s unrealized potential finally find fulfillment, or will we squander this third founding moment through the politics of division and exclusion?

In Aubrey Norton, we find a candidate who speaks directly to these defining questions with the authenticity of lived experience and the wisdom of principled leadership. His vision represents more than political change—it embodies a path toward the radical transformation that our oil wealth now makes possible.

Norton’s emphasis on equity over equality is not a rhetorical flourish but a policy grounded in Guyana’s painful history of exclusion. Despite unprecedented economic growth—with GDP expanding dramatically since 2018—wealth distribution remains stubbornly uneven.

While 48.4 percent of our population still lives on less than $5.50 per day—down from 60.9 percent in 2006—this still represents nearly half our citizens. Rural and interior communities continue to lack access to basic services that urban elites take for granted.

In Norton’s articulation, equity means more than fair outcomes—it means designing systems that acknowledge our disparate starting points and ensuring that those historically marginalized are not merely compensated but genuinely empowered to shape their destinies.

This is not abstract policy theory but an urgent moral imperative. In a nation blessed with some of the world’s largest per-capita oil reserves, no child should face poverty rates approaching 50 percent. No community should lack access to clean water, reliable electricity, or quality healthcare while billions of dollars flow into government coffers. No citizen should feel excluded from the national conversation about how to deploy the most significant economic opportunity in our history.

Norton has demonstrated the kind of leadership this moment demands. He has called for a government that listens rather than lectures, one that serves rather than rules.

In town halls across our diverse nation, he has engaged communities on the issues that matter most to working families—not with the condescension of political theater, but with the respect of genuine consultation. His vision encompasses the strategic deployment of oil revenues not merely for large-scale infrastructure that benefits connected contractors, but also for direct poverty reduction through investments in youth, education, healthcare, small business development, and community ownership—investments that can create lasting prosperity beyond the oil era.

These positions address both the moral architecture of a society still scarred by ethnic mistrust and the practical urgency of ensuring that Guyana’s oil wealth fosters shared prosperity rather than deeper inequality. They confront the fundamental challenge of transforming a nation where children still face poverty, despite being situated atop one of the world’s most valuable natural resource endowments.

At a time when elections risk becoming referenda on ethnic loyalty rather than policy substance, Norton represents something genuinely different—a candidate campaigning on ideas rather than identity, on vision rather than grievance. He has advocated for governance reforms that prioritize transparency and accountability over political patronage.

He has challenged our national imagination by asking the essential question: What kind of society do we wish to become? Not merely economically more prosperous, but more just, more united, and more humane.

While Norton faces significant electoral challenges against incumbent President Irfaan Ali, we believe his message of equity and inclusive governance addresses fundamental issues that transcend electoral calculations. The questions he raises about how we distribute opportunity and wealth will remain urgent regardless of who occupies the State House.

More importantly, his candidacy represents a crucial test of whether Guyanese politics can evolve beyond its historical divisions toward a more mature democracy worthy of our newfound prosperity.

To be clear, this endorsement comes with expectations as high as our hopes.

Should Norton ascend to the presidency, we expect him to uphold the principles he has articulated with such clarity and conviction. We expect him to build a Cabinet not of loyalists and party functionaries, but of technocrats, reformers, and community leaders drawn from across Guyana’s vibrant mosaic.

We insist that poverty eradication, job creation, and the equitable distribution of oil wealth remain at the center of the national agenda, not as campaign slogans to be forgotten after victory, but as measurable benchmarks against which his administration will be judged by history.

We expect him to harness the unprecedented resources at Guyana’s disposal—with oil revenues projected to generate over $150 billion in the coming decades—for transformative investments in human capital, sustainable infrastructure, and economic diversification that will secure prosperity long after the last barrel is extracted from our seabed.

This is not merely about managing wealth, but about building the foundations of a modern, equitable society that can serve as a model for the developing world.

In endorsing Aubrey Norton, we affirm our belief that Guyana can be governed differently and better.

That the vast promise of our oil era can be translated into tangible improvements in the lives of ordinary Guyanese families. That the dream of a truly inclusive and democratic society is not a utopian fantasy, but a political and moral imperative within our reach—if we dare to seize it.

We endorse Norton not because victory is assured—indeed, the path ahead is challenging—but because his vision for equitable development represents the moral imperative of this historic moment.

As Guyana stands at this crossroads, with oil revenues projected to reshape our nation’s destiny for generations, the question is not whether we will be wealthy, but whether we will be just.

We believe Norton understands this profound responsibility.

We believe he possesses the integrity, experience, and vision to lead us toward the more perfect union that our oil wealth now makes possible.

The choice before us is clear: we can continue with politics as usual, allowing our historic opportunity to be squandered through division and short-sighted thinking, or we can embrace the transformative leadership that this moment demands.

We believe, and the evidence strongly suggests that Aubrey Norton is prepared to lead that transformation.

The question is whether we are prepared to follow.

Guyana Business Journal Editorial Board

August 2025

Support Independent Analysis

The Guyana Business Journal Editorial Board welcomes reflections and submissions at terrence.blackman@guyanabusinessjournal.com.

📢 Please support the Guyana Business Journal & Magazine today

August 30, 2025 0 comments

The Ballot Battle: Why FGM’s Last-Minute Court Challenge Could Reshape Guyana’s Election

by guyanabusinessjournal August 20, 2025

written by guyanabusinessjournal

Less than two weeks before Guyana’s September 1 General and Regional Elections, the Forward Guyana Movement has taken the Guyana Elections Commission to court in a constitutional challenge that could fundamentally alter the country’s election process. The case, filed by FGM leader Amanza Walton-Desir, raises a deceptively simple question with profound implications: Should political parties that qualify for elections appear on ballots in all regions, even where they’re not contesting local seats?

FGM has met all legal requirements to participate in the September 1 elections by contesting in more than six regions and competing for at least 13 of the 25 regional seats. However, GECOM has excluded FGM from ballots in Regions 7, 8, and 9—areas where the party is not contesting the regional seats. This exclusion, FGM argues, violates the constitutional rights of voters in those regions and distorts the mathematical foundation of Guyana’s electoral system. “This court challenge is not just about a technicality; it is about giving the people of Guyana the knowledge and the fair choices they need to make the right decision come September 1,” FGM stated in their court filing.

To understand why this matters, one must grasp how Guyana’s unique electoral system works. When you cast your ballot, you’re voting twice: once for 25 regional seats distributed among Guyana’s 10 administrative regions based on population, and once for 40 national “top-up” seats allocated based on your party’s total votes across the entire country. This dual system means your vote counts for both your local representative and for determining how many seats your preferred party receives in the National Assembly overall.

The significance of this dual structure became clear in the 2020 election, where APNU+AFC won more regional seats than PPP/C—13 versus 12—but PPP/C’s stronger national vote total earned them more top-up seats, giving them control of Parliament with a total of 33 seats. This mathematical interplay between regional and national calculations lies at the heart of FGM’s constitutional challenge.

FGM’s exclusion from certain regional ballots creates what electoral experts refer to as an “artificial vote ceiling.” In regions where FGM appears on ballots, votes count toward both the regional contest and the national top-up calculation. But in Regions 7, 8, and 9, potential FGM supporters cannot vote for the party at all—not even for the national list. This matters because Guyana uses the Hare-Quota system to allocate seats, dividing the total valid votes by the number of seats available. Even small vote totals can influence remainder calculations that determine final seat allocation.

Consider this scenario: If FGM received just 1,000 votes each in Regions 7, 8, and 9, that would be 3,000 additional votes toward their national total. In tight elections, such numbers can mean the difference between winning a seat in Parliament or getting shut out entirely. The mathematical precision required by the Hare Quota system makes every vote potentially decisive in determining the final composition of the National Assembly.

The constitutional challenge takes on added significance because Regions 7, 8, and 9 are predominantly inhabited by Guyana’s Indigenous Amerindian population. FGM argues that excluding parties from these regions amounts to discrimination based on race and place of origin. “Excluding parties in these regions disproportionately burdens Amerindian voters, amounting to discrimination on the grounds of race and place of origin,” the court filing states. This creates a two-tier system where Indigenous voters in the interior have fewer electoral choices than coastal voters—a disparity that could violate fundamental constitutional principles of equal treatment.

GECOM has historically only included party names on ballots in regions where they contest geographic seats. This practice, while administratively simpler, may not align with the constitutional requirements of Guyana’s proportional representation system. The Representation of the People Act requires parties to contest at least six regions to qualify for elections, but it doesn’t explicitly address whether qualified parties must appear on all regional ballots for national list purposes. This ambiguity has created the legal opening that FGM is now exploiting through the courts.

FGM’s legal team, led by Dr. Vivan Williams of VMW Law, is seeking urgent relief that would declare unconstitutional any elections held without full party inclusion, restrain GECOM from excluding qualified parties from national ballots, direct immediate inclusion of FGM in Regions 7, 8, and 9 ballots, and ensure equal participation for voters in all regions. The scope of this relief could necessitate fundamental changes to how GECOM administers elections, potentially affecting ballot design, voter education, and counting procedures nationwide.

This case could establish crucial precedents for Guyana’s democratic future. If FGM prevails, it could force GECOM to redesign ballots and alter vote-counting procedures for current and future elections. If GECOM’s position is upheld, it could cement a practice that effectively creates different classes of electoral participation based on geography. The timing adds urgency to an already complex situation, as any court ruling could require last-minute changes to electoral procedures just days before voting begins.

As Guyana enters its oil-rich future, ensuring equal democratic participation becomes more than a legal technicality—it’s a foundation for national unity and legitimate governance. The country’s newfound petroleum wealth makes inclusive representation crucial for managing resources and maintaining social cohesion across diverse communities. The mathematical precision of the Hare Quota system, which governs seat allocation, stands in stark contrast to the constitutional ambiguities this case seeks to resolve.

The High Court must now balance competing constitutional principles: administrative efficiency versus democratic inclusion, regional autonomy versus national representation, and practical electoral management versus theoretical constitutional rights. For voters in Regions 7, 8, and 9, the outcome could determine whether they have the same electoral choices as their fellow citizens in other parts of Guyana. For FGM, it could mean the difference between parliamentary representation and political irrelevance.

Whether the courts side with FGM’s expansive interpretation of electoral rights or GECOM’s restrictive administrative approach will help define the boundaries of democratic participation in South America’s newest oil power. As one constitutional expert noted, “This case forces us to confront fundamental questions about what constitutes fair and equal electoral participation in a complex democratic system.” The resolution will likely influence not only the immediate September 1 election but also the long-term development of Guyana’s democratic institutions as the country navigates its transformation into a major oil producer.

FGM’s constitutional challenge ultimately highlights the tension between administrative convenience and democratic inclusion in Guyana’s sophisticated electoral system. The court’s decision could significantly reshape how the country conducts elections and ensure equal representation for all Guyanese, regardless of their place of residence. In a nation where mathematical precision determines political power through the Hare Quota system, the exclusion of qualified parties from any regional ballot represents not just a procedural irregularity but a fundamental distortion of the democratic process that the constitution was designed to protect.

This analysis is based on court filings, constitutional documents, and research on electoral systems. The case remains pending before the High Court.

Guyana Business Journal

Aug 20, 2025

Support Independent Analysis

The Guyana Business Journal Editorial Board welcomes reflections and submissions at terrence.blackman@guyanabusinessjournal.com.

📢 Please support the Guyana Business Journal & Magazine today

Thank you for standing with us.

Dr. Terrence Richard Blackman

Guyana Business Journal

August 20, 2025 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts