|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Members of Parliament from the Parliamentary Opposition, Ganesh Mahipaul and Vinceroy Jordan, have raised alarming concerns over what they describe as political intimidation and police harassment targeting Indo-Guyanese supporters of the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) following a recent bottom house meeting held by Opposition Leader Aubrey Norton in the Champagne area, Region 5.
During a recent social media broadcast, Mahipaul and Jordan highlighted that members of the Indo-Guyanese community in Region 5 are facing increasing pressure from the ruling People’s Progressive Party (PPP) after showing signs of support for the opposition. Mahipaul stressed, “The PPP paints Guyana as a booming, peaceful place, but the reality is different. Political and police harassment is rampant, especially in Region 5, where Indo-Guyanese are now being targeted for supporting the PNCR.”
According to Jordan, the harassment escalated following Norton’s visit to the predominantly Indo-Guyanese community of Champagne. “The leader of the opposition and our team visited the Champagne area, and we were well received. But just hours after, residents reported being harassed by a prominent rice farmer, allegedly on PPP instructions, for attending the meeting,” Jordan explained.
Jordan also alleged that the harassment took a sinister turn when police officers visited the home of a family that had attended the meeting. “The police arrived at the home in Champagne, ransacked the place, and threatened the family without presenting any search warrant. They accused them of cybercrime and threatened to take their laptops and smartphones,” Jordan said. He added that the children of the family were traumatized, with the incident leaving the family in shock.
Both MPs emphasized that this is part of a broader pattern of intimidation against Indo-Guyanese who dare to support the opposition. “This isn’t the first time,” Jordan remarked, referencing the Azeez family in Bush Lot, whose butcher shop was burned after they openly supported the PNCR. “The PPP cannot stand the idea of losing Indo-Guyanese support, and they are resorting to scare tactics,” he added.
Mahipaul further pointed out that the government’s heavy-handedness is not limited to intimidation by individuals but extends to state institutions. “Suddenly, the police are involved. Suddenly, the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) and Central Housing and Planning Authority (CH&PA) are checking these businesses. This is targeted harassment by state agencies to silence anyone who supports the PNCR,” Mahipaul asserted.
The MPs also touched on the growing dissatisfaction among Indo-Guyanese in traditional PPP strongholds, which they say is evidenced by the declining voter turnout for the PPP in recent elections. Mahipaul noted, “We saw it in the local government elections. Where the PPP used to get 300 votes, they now get 240. The Indo-Guyanese community is waking up to the realities of the PPP’s failures.”
Jordan made it clear that the PNCR would continue to support any Guyanese, regardless of ethnicity, facing such intimidation. “We will stand with our supporters. We will provide legal resources, and we will ensure that the rights of these citizens are protected,” he declared.
The MPs’ comments come at a time when Guyana’s political landscape remains highly polarized. The allegations of intimidation and police harassment have added to the growing narrative that the ruling PPP is seeking to use its power to suppress dissent within its traditional support base.
The ongoing developments highlight the challenges the opposition faces in rallying support in regions long dominated by the PPP. However, both Mahipaul and Jordan remain steadfast in their resolve, vowing to continue their outreach efforts. “We will continue to engage with Indo-Guyanese communities, and no amount of intimidation will stop us,” Mahipaul said defiantly.
These claims of political repression are underscored by the broader context of growing concerns over Guyana’s enforcement mechanisms. Recently, the government amended the Fugitive Offenders Act to streamline extradition processes, raising further questions about how these legal tools may be used in the politically charged atmosphere of the country.
