SOMEBODY needs to be bold enough to say it without any fear of successful contradiction. This person needs to do a clear analysis of the four months that Azruddin Mohamed has been elected as Guyana’s opposition leader. They need to be objectively honest and fair.
Some opposition members are incapable of criticising Mohamed, even when he does something that he should not do or embarrasses the opposition. These are WIIN members who sometimes give off cult-like vibes when it comes to their leader, as they appear brain-dead and unwilling to contradict him. These opposition politicians still don’t understand the role that they have been elected to play in Guyana’s political landscape, and are on a fishing expedition, it would seem, without any hooks.
The other group, APNU politicians, must be commended for their conduct when it comes to criticising Mohamed. They know that he doesn’t have any solid political policies or plans to talk about other than the veiled philanthropic work that he does for people, which is purely political.
I feel that the APNU opposition does not respect or like him as opposition leader, but is being politically strategic.
I think Mohamed is the worst opposition leader in Guyana’s history, judging from his tenure over the past four months. I intend to analyse his approach to governance and the job at a later date, but for now, he is failing miserably and shamefully when compared to the conduct of his predecessors.
The lack of leadership, political knowledge and policy understanding is quite appalling. Mohamed seems not to play a strategy in politics, and is solely depending on his money and respect for his father in the country to help him.
Over the last four months, I could see now why there was severe criticism regarding his fitness for office, his focus on personal legal battles, and his impact on opposition unity. Six months after the elections, the opposition is still battered, and unity is nonexistent within the opposition. And the opposition leader couldn’t care less at this point about the need for discussions with APNU or FMG about various factors. Rather than consolidating the opposition, Mohamed’s election has exacerbated internal fractures.
This is so because Mohamed’s tenure is characterised more by self-preservation than a national agenda.
Much of his political capital is spent addressing his own criminal charges and fighting extradition to the United States for alleged gold smuggling and money laundering.
It must not escape the public’s eye that, despite calling for transparency from government ministers, Mohamed has reportedly failed to publish his own asset declarations as required by the Integrity Commission for Members of Parliament. No other opposition leader has the integrity issues that he is faced with now.
Another criticism of Mohamed is that he is frequently accused of using his platform to attack personal and political enemies under the guise of fighting corruption. He has launched public attacks on government ministers, such as questioning the wealth of the minister of agriculture and tourism, while facing similar accusations regarding his own “unaccounted wealth”.
As opposition leader, I think he should look within his circle; he should put his theory to the test, and his party should take the government, ministers, persons, and organisations to court over the corruption allegations, but it is all a classic smokescreen.
I think his actions are a ‘pattern of lies’ intended to distract the public from his international sanctions and local tax evasion charges, including the alleged undervaluation of luxury vehicles like the 2020 Lamborghini.
Interestingly, the role of the opposition leader is a constitutional pillar intended to hold the government accountable and safeguard the interests of all citizens.
Mohamed is, therefore, unfit for public office, and represents an “international economic threat” to the country due to U.S. sanctions. His actions, such as driving an unregistered Lamborghini into Parliament, have been cited as examples of a disregard for the Rule of Law he is sworn to uphold.
I am convinced that Mohamed’s approach lacks the necessary rigour to hold the government accountable through conventional parliamentary and constitutional mechanisms. Optics are important, but should not be prioritised over oversight. If you were to look at his frequent use of social media and public distribution of aid as “image laundering” rather than substantive policy critique, you would get the picture.
While Aubrey Norton, Joseph Harmon, Bharrat Jagdeo, David Granger, Robert Corbin, Desmond Hoyte, and Forbes Burnham were respected giants in the opposition politics of their time, Mohamed has no respect, substance, or political intelligence. This is a severe downgrade from what the public is accustomed to, and Mohamed does not even possess the oratory skills to bluff his way.
He spends more time detailing his personal philanthropy on Facebook than engaging in the intricate legislative work required of an opposition leader. It is unfortunate that the masses will have to settle for a Facebook opposition leader.
Unlike Norton, who often produces detailed policy alternatives, I think that Mohamed has “policy gaps” and a lack of clear legislative strategy beyond vague calls for “accountability.”
Those who are following Mohamed and appear obsessed with turning the personal grief and misfortune of others into a political blame game against the government are baby politicians and novices. This is the most disappointing and distasteful trend developing in Guyanese politics.
It’s only four months, and his irresponsible conduct has already been called out by the Ministry of Human Services, which has criticised his use of vulnerable individuals, including children and abuse victims, as ‘political props’, suggesting a lack of judgment and sensitivity.
Finally, the poor people and opposition supporters are not better off because of Mohamed’s politics and political philanthropy. They don’t see Mohamed as a victim of political witch-hunting or as a target of government trumped-up charges.
They see clearly. They know that Mohamed can’t and will not do anything for them and their state without a camera. They know that he can’t defend himself without his political advisers, who are pulling his strings in return for their pots of silver-plated or gold coins. The public sees through the politics of division, race, rage, violence, optics, convenience, self-interest, and money.
No opposition leader worth his salt would conduct himself like Mohamed does for likes and shares. No opposition leader would use people who are innocent as a shield from extradition and the long arm of justice.
No opposition leader would sacrifice the combination of the opposition’s strength to go it alone on matters of integrity, corruption, and mismanagement like Mohamed is delusional in doing.
No opposition leader deserves the title ‘worst’ more than Mohamed.
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Guyana National Newspapers Limited.45634563