Letter to Editor Questions Political Leaders on Shared Governance and Accountability Following Tributes to Robert Corbin

Annette Ferguson wrote to the Editor of Kaieteur News on October 22, 2026, expressing disappointment following media reports concerning remarks made by Bharrat Jagdeo, the Former President and General Secretary of the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C), during the night of reflection honoring the late Comrade Robert Herman Orlando Corbin, CCH, who was the former Leader of the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) and Leader of the Opposition. Ferguson stated that her comments were based on media reports because the audio at the gathering was not clear for her and others situated towards the far rear under the tents.

Ferguson noted a troubling aspect of public life, observing that while some individuals face attacks on their character, accusations, misrepresentation, and attempts to undermine their reputations while alive, others who opposed or criticized them attend their wakes, nights of reflection, and funeral services to offer glowing tributes after their death. She asserted that while political opponents can disagree, the genuine test of respect is not what is said after death, but how one treats someone and whether their principles are honored while they are alive.

Regarding Jagdeo’s reported favorable comments about Corbin’s leadership and vision for Guyana, including the necessity of political cooperation, Ferguson raised a question about the realization of commitments associated with their engagement. She referenced an October 18, 2026, article in Village Voice News titled “Jeffrey Questions Jagdeo’s Commitment to Corbin’s Shared Governance Agreement,” which revisited the 2003 Constructive Engagement Agreement between then President Jagdeo and Opposition Leader Corbin, an agreement that addressed parliamentary and constitutional reform, accountability, and greater political inclusion. Ferguson maintained that the true value of political agreements is determined by whether commitments are honored and meaningful changes are delivered, not just by the words signed or promises made.

Ferguson contended that shared governance cannot be merely a convenient expression used when political leaders gather to mourn a former opponent. Instead, it must be demonstrated through respect for democratic institutions, meaningful parliamentary oversight, transparency, accountability, and a sincere commitment to ensuring all Guyanese have a stake in the nation’s development. She then posed a question regarding the meaning of shared governance in the context of managing and distributing Guyana’s oil wealth.

While the government has cited investments in infrastructure, education, healthcare, housing, and other sectors as evidence of benefits from growing petroleum resources, Ferguson stated that these investments require fair assessment, and their existence does not eliminate the public's right to question if the benefits are reaching citizens equitably. She questioned whether working families are managing the cost of living, if young people are finding suitable employment for sustainable futures, if pensioners and vulnerable citizens are adequately supported, and if residents of hinterland, riverain, rural, and underserved communities are receiving their fair share of national development. Ferguson characterized these inquiries as legitimate questions, not acts of disloyalty to Guyana.

She argued that economic growth, large budgets, and major infrastructure announcements must ultimately result in improved living conditions, better public services, and sustainable opportunities for the populace. Although she could not state with certainty what Corbin would have said about current decisions, she suggested that given his advocacy for political inclusion and shared governance, it was reasonable to ask if he would have demanded greater accountability and transparency in public spending and a fairer distribution of benefits from natural resources. She questioned whether he would accept a situation where political affiliation or proximity to power dictated who gained the most opportunities, or if he would not have pushed for a system where every Guyanese could participate in and benefit from national development regardless of ethnicity, political persuasion, or location.

Ferguson urged Jagdeo and his colleagues to seriously consider these points, emphasizing that Guyana’s oil wealth belongs to the nation, not any specific political party or administration. She stated that those governing are responsible for managing these resources transparently, ensuring value for public money, and protecting the interests of current and future generations. She concluded that if Jagdeo wished to invoke Corbin’s legacy as a basis for political cooperation, he and his colleagues must also reflect on whether their own actions uphold the principles of inclusion, accountability, and shared national development. Cooperation, she noted, cannot mean asking the opposition to endorse government decisions without meaningful scrutiny, nor can it mean speaking of unity while sidestepping difficult questions about the management of national assets.

Citing the biblical teaching in 1 John 3:18, Ferguson highlighted the difference between words and actions, suggesting that while it is easy to praise someone after they pass, the greater test is whether their convictions were respected and they were engaged with honestly and in good faith while they were alive. As a Guyanese by birth, she firmly believes citizens possess both the right and the responsibility to question those in power. She concluded by urging that Robert Corbin be honored not just through tributes, but by examining his advocated principles and demanding that leaders enact them. She stated that Jagdeo and his colleagues have a chance to show that the words spoken in Corbin’s honor represent more than a ceremonial tribute by strengthening accountability, respecting democratic institutions, and ensuring Guyana’s natural resource wealth creates equitable benefits for all its people. She asserted that the true measure of Corbin’s legacy would be whether the principles he championed are respected and advanced as the nation progresses.