Social commentator GHK Lall has expressed deep skepticism about the prospects for cooperation in Guyana’s Parliament following the election of Azruddin Mohamed as Leader of the Opposition, warning that entrenched political hostility and mistrust threaten to further weaken democratic governance.
Mohamed, leader of the We Invest in Nationhood (WIN) party, was elected Leader of the Opposition on Monday morning, January 26, 2026, at approximately 10:00 a.m., following months of political deadlock and sustained agitation from opposition parties and civil society. His election came against the backdrop of the General and Regional Elections held on September 1, 2025, and the convening of the 13th Parliament on November 3, 2025. Parliament held its second sitting on Monday for the reading of the 2026 National Budget.
In his first remarks after assuming office, Mohamed called for cooperation in Parliament—a gesture Lall acknowledged as “the right note,” but one he questioned could realistically materialise in Guyana’s deeply adversarial political climate. “In a polity where contentiousness and conflict are the norms,” Lall asked, how sustainable could cooperation be, and which political forces were genuinely prepared to work with Mohamed?
Lall argued that the political environment surrounding Mohamed’s rise offers little encouragement. He said the A Partnership for National Unity (APNU), which includes the People’s National Congress (PNCR), is “still smarting from its takedown by this most surprising of newcomers and political amateurs,” making cooperation uncertain. He was equally critical of the governing People’s Progressive Party (PPP), which he accused of attempting to block Mohamed’s ascension. “The [People’s Progressive Party (PPP) Govt went full pedal-to-the-floor to block Mr. Mohamed’s all but foregone election, while it hustled to knock him down, and get him out of here on the fastest plane,” Lall wrote, concluding that “this is not the kind of environment that holds much promise for cooperation.”
Mohamed secured the opposition leadership with 17 of the 29 opposition votes in the 65-seat National Assembly. Sixteen WIN members were joined by Amanza Walton-Desir of the Forward Guyana Movement (FGM). APNU, which controls 12 opposition seats, abstained from the vote—a decision widely criticised as shortsighted, particularly given the constitutional importance of the post and the likelihood that APNU will need WIN and FGM support on future parliamentary matters.
Lall described cooperation between political parties in Guyana as so rare that it amounts to a “Black Swan event,” occurring only after “many lost generations.” He questioned why rival parties would allow Mohamed “the opening, the credit, for getting a motion or a bill moving to final fruition,” suggesting instead that political forces may seek to limit his influence. While Mohamed could not be stopped during the December–January impasse, Lall warned that he could still be “grounded, reduced to an impotent force, going forward.”
He pointed to delays in convening Parliament and electing the Opposition Leader as evidence of democratic strain, noting that without pressure from the diplomatic community, the issue “could still have been hanging.” Lall remarked pointedly that this was “a fine way to speak of democracy.”
Looking ahead, Lall warned of fragmentation within the opposition, describing the presence of “two main opposition columns or phalanxes,” APNU and WIN, potentially pursuing different priorities. This, he cautioned, could result in “representation in fragments,” marked by overlap, discord, and “angry disharmony,” weakening parliamentary oversight.
With budget debates now underway, Lall cautioned that Parliament risks becoming what he described as a “Chamber of Babylonian cacophonies,” where voices talk past one another and contributions lose meaning. Such a scenario, he warned, would further erode public confidence and reduce the legislature to a platform for “premeditated vengefulness” rather than national problem-solving.
Lall concluded that prolonged political hostility surrounding Mohamed’s leadership would only deepen divisions, with ordinary Guyanese paying the price. “The longer that WIN’s Mohamed is at liberty to remain in this country, the more the political tumors will balloon,” he wrote, adding that the ultimate casualties would be “the Guyanese people and their smashed aspirations.” On the prospect of cooperation, his verdict was blunt: “Cooperation, where the hell did that cat come from, got dragged into this house? Not a chance, comrade.”
