A few months ago, President Irfaan Ali said that his government was looking for ways to help the religious establishment, and I pointed out that what he was really after was the domination of the largely African Christian churches. That was not an astute prediction as I have argued many times in this column that there is not a single area of African social life that, in one way or another, the oligarchy of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) has not sought to undermine, suppress and dominate. This PPP’s objective is not the inevitable outcome of the multiethnic context of Guyana – it is possible for Guyanese to be organised to live peaceful, democratic, productive lives – but is a result of the dictatorial path the PPP and its associates have deliberately chosen.
In relation to the churches, the PPP’s project is based on an outmoded view of the relationship between the leadership and the laity of these churches, and thus it has always been on the lookout for particularly high churchmen to help it in this task. The party does not understand that in modern times the leaderships of churches in general have been found morally, economically and politically wanting so often that congregations have learnt to be more discriminating and so better differentiate between the will of high churchmen and that of the deity.
As it is with almost everything that is in decline in Guyana, the PPP has made s contribution to the downward trend of religious authority. How can one forget Bishop Edghill’s endorsement to the effect that if Jesus returned to earth, he would vote for the PPP! Of course, he was smart enough to seek a level of disclaimer by making his remark reflect improbability and humor.
Pastor Exton Clarke, president of the Seventh Day Adventist (SDA) Church in Guyana has not been that subtle in his endorsement of President Irfaan Ali. The position he has taken is much more concrete than that of the Bishop’s, and in the realm of politics, reality trumps belief, and I would be grateful if the good Pastor would substantiate with empirical facts his reported assessment of President Ali as ‘an advocate for leadership based on morality, justice, truth, and equity. He is a God-fearing leader, who I believe fears God more than the Office of President’ (VV: 07/05/ 2025).
Coming from a high churchman, this comparison between the power of God and the presidency, which office incidentally Dr. Ali himself happens to hold, is interesting in many ways. For one thing, even if he deliberately intends his comment about Dr. Ali not to be applied to the PPP, it suggests that Mr. Clarke may not understand the structure of political power in Guyana. President Ali is the de jure but certainly not the de facto final arbiter of government policies: that task rests with the leader and possibly some of the high oligarchs of the PPP.
Furthermore, to say that Dr. Ali is ‘an advocate for leadership based on morality, justice, truth, and equity,’ could, if not properly defined to include both verbalising and successfully implementing the goals of one’s advocacy, is saying little or nothing. So any response must tell us not only what is said, believed or is the law; it must also relate what has been the outcome desired and achieved. Also, while you might assess the president might be God-fearing, that does not – particularly in the political realm – mean that he is ‘good.’ So-called God-fearing politicians kill and destroy the lives of millions of people.
Pastor Clarke, according to the representative African leadership, and my lesser objective assessment of what is taking pace in Guyana, your endorsement of President Ali is flawed and truth should be the foundation stone of both the thought and behaviour of all of us, but particularly of every high churchman who has chosen the task of leading his flock to salvation. To avoid your response being couched in the realm of belief and hope and be properly grounded in concrete daily realities, I suggest some concerns that should be addressed in any response.
Here is the 2025 political context of Guyana as stated in perhaps the world’s most comprehensive and respected political index: ‘Latin America and the Caribbean has five democratising countries … Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Dominican Republic, and Honduras. Three of them – Bolivia, Brazil, and Ecuador – are among the countries that are successfully reversing autocratization processes of the previous. Yet, autocratization is widespread in the region, with seven countries currently regressing: Argentina, El Salvador, Guyana, Haiti, Mexico, Nicaragua, and Peru’ (V-Dem, Report 2025).
Only recently Transparency International (TI) that the Guyanese state has been ‘captured’ and is being used by the PPP and its associates in the private sector. So, Pastor Clarke, in your response, you will need to meet the contention that Guyana is politically ‘regressing’ under the presidency of the God-fearing Dr. Irfaan Ali.
And there are other hurdles. To assist in substantiating the V-Dem and TI contentions in its 2025 presentation to the Universal Periodic Review of the United Nations International Decade for People of African Descent, the Guyana chapter of that body, which brings together 78 African-centered organisations, had, among many other things, the following to say of the Ali government (file:///C:/Users/henry/Downloads/ _UPR49_GUY_E_Main.pdf).
Since it last reported ‘Guyana experienced an election fraught with controversy and irregularities and a change in government. Now headed by the People’s Progressive Party/Civic – a predominantly Indian Guyanese political party – government has not made progress on many of the issues supported by the previous government, while still maintaining the rhetorical stance. African Guyanese have lost ground on protections of labour rights, land ownership, protection against racial discrimination, fair and equitable treatment in the award of contracts, to name a few’.
Last week I argued that one of the unintended consequences of the PPP government’s policy of ethnic/political dominance has been a diminution in the public status of policing in Guyana. In its report IDPAD(G) said: ‘Since assuming office in August 2020, the current government has made a concerted effort to place Indian Guyanese police officers in senior management denying promotion to their more qualified and experienced African Guyanese counterparts.
The result is that, despite having an African Guyanese as the highest-ranking officer, the rank and file, predominantly African Guyanese are supervised and follow the instructions of senior officers who are now majority Indian Guyanese. The government has argued that the Security Forces are ethnically imbalanced. Yet, the State has not tabled a cogent policy for affirmative action in any sphere of human development that ensures all ethnic groups are on equal footing within the society. The GPF has become demoralized, weakened, and politically aligned, and its professionalism has not improved’ (Ibid).
Pastor Clark, the evidence suggests that while you are busying yourself praising the president – and by inference the PPP’ government – your constituency is under severe all-round pressure from those same sources for no other reason than their wish, now with your support, to undermine their human, democratic right to collective and individual self-government.
For years, this column – and IDPAD(G) in the above report – has called upon the regime to conduct an independent ‘ethnic disparity assessment’ to identify and deal with the inequities if and where they exist. Perhaps Pastor, rather than misleading your flock, you could use your apparent friendship with the president to accomplish this task. But let me warn you: since it is the autocratic PPP that for political reasons over two decades, has deliberately initiated or expanded the existing disparities, you would likely not succeed.
