IN Guyana, a true opposition leader always acts as a crucial check on power. This person is often defined by courage, integrity and the ability to inspire change despite adversity. I will say it again, loudly. Cheddi Jagan, Forbes Burnham, Bharrat Jagdeo, Desmond Hoyte, David Granger and Robert Crobin inspired change in the political landscape by shifting the paradigm.
They challenged complacency, representing a ‘second government’ that prevented authoritarianism and led from the front, often speaking truth when it is unpopular, inconvenient, or dangerous. I am wise enough to admit it. I am intelligent enough to recognise the truth in Benjamin Disraeli and General Douglas MacArthur’s statements that, “No Government can be long secure without a formidable Opposition” and “A true leader has the confidence to stand alone, the courage to make tough decisions and the compassion to listen to the needs of others.”
A true, wise and effective opposition leader does not spend his days manufacturing outrage for social media clicks, while his party quietly watches his credibility collapse in real time. Yet that is precisely the troubling image being projected by opposition leader and sanctioned businessman, Azruddin Mohamed and the We Invest in Nationhood (WIN) party.
There is an alarming and growing concern among seasoned political minds within WIN that their leader, Mohamed, is imploding politically under the weight of his own emotional reactions, personal frustrations, and increasingly theatrical style of politics. It is comical yet frightening to watch these episodes of political buffoonery play out in the year 2026.
Rather than presenting himself as a disciplined national figure capable of leading a serious opposition movement, Mohamed often appears easily provoked, easily taunted, and deeply consumed by the financial setbacks facing his businesses and the millions of dollars in revenue reportedly lost over time as a direct result of the government safeguarding the economy and people from being associated with this sanctioned individual.
That image does not inspire confidence in leadership. It raises questions about temperament, focus, and political maturity.
Guyanese are not looking for an opposition leader who behaves like an angry influencer chasing online engagement. It would appear that this politician is attention starved, and he craves likes and shares. They are looking for someone capable of articulating policy alternatives, scrutinising legislation, strengthening democratic institutions and offering hope grounded in substance rather than spectacle.
Recently, the main opposition party, the We Invest in Nationhood Party (WIN) and Team Mohamed’s Facebook Page have been publishing a series of posts and videos that purport to prove the alleged corruption of several high-ranking government officials, businessmen, contractors and private individuals.
The opposition leader, Azruddin Mohamed, has deliberately launched attacks and criticised the alleged corruption against these individuals in most of those posts and videos. He often asks leading questions and makes generalisations to suit his negative narrative about the government. He also appears to donate to people in need, only to have the beneficiaries’ faces plastered across social media pages in photos and videos.
This approach is deeply troubling and fundamentally wrong for several reasons.
First, allegations are not evidence. In fact, the narratives are not true. Many of the stories told are manufactured lies. Where there is truth in the posts that he exposes, Mohamed is more dramatic than is necessary. MP Odessa Primus always tries to outdo him, wrestling attention away from the issue they are trying to highlight.
A responsible opposition leader must understand the difference between raising legitimate questions and recklessly conducting public trials through social media propaganda. Constantly publishing rehearsed videos filled with insinuations, selective narratives, dramatic music, and emotionally charged commentary may excite supporters online, but it does little to strengthen democracy or public trust. Leadership requires restraint, discipline, and respect for due process.
Second, the exploitation of vulnerable citizens for political branding is unbecoming of anyone seeking national office. Charity should never become a marketing campaign. When struggling families and needy individuals are turned into social media props for political mileage, it cheapens both the act of giving and the dignity of those receiving assistance. Genuine compassion does not need a camera crew, scripted scenes, or carefully edited videos designed to create a saviour narrative.
Most importantly, Mohamed appears to misunderstand the actual role of an opposition leader in a parliamentary democracy. The opposition is not supposed to function as a permanent online outrage machine. Its duty is to hold the government accountable through facts, parliamentary engagement, policy analysis, constituency work, and national dialogue.
A serious opposition leader would be in communities listening to people without the need for staged productions. He would be in Parliament challenging ministers with credible evidence and coherent arguments. He would present detailed plans on the economy, crime, healthcare, infrastructure, education, and the cost of living. He would build alliances, demonstrate emotional control under pressure, and show the nation that he possesses the temperament required to govern.
Instead, what the public often sees are heavily scripted, rehearsed videos designed more for emotional manipulation than meaningful national discussion. These productions may fool some people temporarily, but many Guyanese can recognise political theatre when they see it.
The nation deserves authenticity, not manufactured outrage packaged for Facebook consumption.
Within WIN itself, experienced politicians must surely recognise the danger. They are watching a leader who increasingly appears reactive rather than strategic, emotional rather than disciplined, and performative rather than statesmanlike. Every opposition movement reaches a moment when it must decide whether it is building a serious political alternative or merely creating viral content for public consumption.
Guyana’s future is too important for politics driven by resentment, theatrics, and personal vendettas. The country needs leaders both in government and opposition who can elevate national discourse rather than drag it into a cycle of sensationalism and division.
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.