Dear Editor,
I write in response to the letter by Mr. Terrence Campbell published in your newspaper regarding my earlier correspondence titled, “It would appear that Freedom House and Congress Place are working in tandem to frustrate WIN in the Region 10 leadership impasse.” Mr. Campbell seeks to dismiss my argument by suggesting that it moves from “fact to fiction.” However, his response does not address the central issue raised in my letter: that there exists a clearly established process for resolving a tie within a Regional Democratic Council (RDC), and that the failure partially rest with the APNU.
While Mr. Campbell asserts that Congress Place has “no authority” in the matter, this characterization does not fully engage with the broader political dynamics that have emerged in several regions following the 2025 general elections. In a number of instances, voting patterns within RDCs have raised legitimate questions about whether political alignments between the APNU and PPP have influenced outcomes in ways that may not fully reflect the expectations of the electorate.
It is worth recalling that approximately four out of every five Guyanese voters supported parties other than the APNU in the 2025 elections. The APNU secured some 18 percent of the national vote. In this context, the party’s ability to secure leadership positions in multiple RDCs, through arrangements with the PPP, has prompted public discussion about whether such outcomes are consistent with the electorate’s expressed will.
Mr. Campbell’s letter relies heavily on political rhetoric rather than engaging substantively with the procedural issues at hand. In contrast, the General Secretary of the PNC, Mr. Sherwin Benjamin, has publicly commented on the circumstances surrounding regional leadership outcomes, including during discussions on the Credible Sources programme regarding Regions 4 and 10. In that discussion, Mr. Benjamin acknowledged that in Region 4 the PPP secured a plurality of the votes but not an outright majority, and that the WIN party abstained during the process (see computation below in table).
https://www.stabroeknews.com/images/2026/03/Untitled-1-750x336.jpg[1]
The right of any political party to abstain from a vote is a legitimate parliamentary and democratic option. In Region 4, where the PPP secured 49 percent of the vote compared to the APNU’s 26 percent, the decision by the WIN Party to abstain may reasonably be interpreted as reflecting its assessment of the electoral realities and the preferences expressed by voters in that region. Political parties must ultimately exercise their judgment based on what they believe best reflects the interests of their supporters and the wider electorate.
Turning to Region 10, the circumstances there also deserve careful consideration. Electoral figures indicate that the WIN party secured just under 50 percent of the vote in that region, while the APNU received approximately 28 percent. Yet the leadership outcome did not reflect that plurality. This situation understandably prompts questions about whether the process fully reflected the will expressed by voters. These are legitimate concerns that should be addressed through transparent adherence to the legal procedures governing RDC operations.
What occurred in Region 10, as evidenced by voting patterns, was a convergence of support between the APNU and PPP that effectively excluded the party with the highest vote share from leadership. This outcome, regardless of how it is characterized, raises substantive questions about the functioning of democratic processes at the regional level. It is also important to recognize that Guyana’s political environment is evolving. The emergence of new political actors reflects the electorate’s desire for broader representation and improved governance. In that context, all parties—whether long established or newly formed—must respect the choices of voters and approach governance with humility and a commitment to service.
For these reasons, I respectfully maintain the position outlined in my earlier correspondence. The focus should remain on the substantive question before the public: why the established procedures for resolving the Region 10 leadership impasse have not yet been fully implemented, and how it came to pass that the parties with a combined vote share formed the leadership while the party with the plurality was excluded. What the Guyanese people are observing is another attempt of the APNU to rig the process. The WIN Party has all rights to reject the APNU postures since it is clear that the APNU leaders seem to have not acquired the comprehension capacity to understand the real truth that the voters have demoted them to the “small pins” on the clothes line.