Column: The will of the majority must prevail in UNC election

Members of the United National Congress (UNC) are looking for clear signals from party leader Basdeo Panday when he launches his re-election campaign on Saturday to hear if he will stand up for freedom and democracy or follow the strategy already marked by some of his people on the ground.

Panday has been in England and is expected home on Wednesday.

In his absence his campaign team has been working on preparing the groundwork for what Panday has promised would be an "aggressive campaign."

But one aspect of the strategy seems to be at odds with Panday's own political and personal philosophy.

Panday has always been an advocate for freedom and democracy although his critics say that's only for public consumption.

He is on record as saying that if voters reject him and choose a new leader in the January 24th internal election he will leave "with joy in my heart." But that's not what MPs Roodal Moonilal and Vasant Bharath are suggesting.

They seem to have an opposite position. They have said even if Panday loses, he would still have the support of the legislators who signed the recent pledge of support and would therefore continue to be opposition leader although he won't be leader of the party.

Ten MPs and four of the six UNC Senators signed that document.

All along Panday has welcomed competition and has boasted that the UNC is the most democratic political party in the country and the region because of its policy of electing its officials - including its leader - through a system of one-member-one-vote.

This election is the first in which he is facing a direct challenge to his leadership. And its coming from two of his MPs - Ramesh L. Maharaj and Kamla Persad-Bissessar. Still, his public pronouncements so far have not in any way indicated that he would stand against the democratic will of the people.

He insists that he will win and he has charged that there is some sort of conspiracy with former UNC members who defected to the Congress of the People (COP) to steal the UNC base.

But there is no sound basis for that in much the same way as there is no sound basis for allegations that Patrick Manning is helping out by getting CEPEP workers to sign up as members only to vote for Panday.

UNC Deputy Leader Jack Warner, who is running for the chairmanship, has expressed deep concerns about the delay in publishing the preliminary membership list which should have been available since last Saturday. And he is not buying the argument that the workload is causing the delay.

The party is saying it has to be careful that it scrutinizes each new membership application "with a fine-tooth comb" to ensure that there is nothing bogus and that people don't hold dual membership in political parties.

That issue of the list is causing some members to ask if there is truth in allegations that the membership committee is "sanitizing" the list make it acceptable by the Panday camp. Committee chair Kelvin Ramnath has dismissed that outright.

But people are still skeptical and are looking to Saturday for clear signals from Panday about how this battle would be fought; UNC members want to hear from "the chief" that he remains committed to his public statements about democracy.

They are waiting to hear his pledge that if he does not win the vote, he would not subvert the democratic will of the people by remaining opposition leader while there is a legitimate leader of the party elected by the membership.

This would be different to the time when he had anointed Winston Dookeran as UNC leader and remained opposition leader.

The membership voted in that election too but there was no challenger, so in principle Dookeran was the leader even before his name appeared on the ballot.

In this election it is an open contest involving three candidates who are free to campaign and seek the support of each member. In such a case, assuming that the process is free and fair, whoever wins must be accepted by all within the UNC as the leader both inside the Parliament and in the party executive.

Panday must insist on that and he needs to tell the people that. That in itself would win him support from "confused" members.

Any other plan would amount to an attack on freedom and democracy, which is against Panday's political philosophy. Even if the 14 decide that they want him to be the leader of the opposition he must tell them no because the party should rally behind its leader.

If he wins, nothing changes. He is already party leader and leader of the opposition.

But if Maharaj or Persad-Bissessar wins, he must step down and tell those who support him to stand firm with the new leader and help unite the party.

It would demonstrate that he is indeed a leader and that he respects the will of the people. Any other decision would not and must not be acceptable to the general membership of the UNC.

No one can have an argument with Moonlilal and Bharath or any of the others who have publicly pledged their support for Panday. That is their right and they should campaign aggressively to have their leader re-elected.

But they must accept the verdict of the people.

If Panday does not win, it is their duty and responsibility to support the new leader. That is the democratic thing to do.

A minority of 14 MPs and Senators must not be allowed to overturn a decision of the majority. That would be a dictatorship and a betrayal of everything the UNC has ever stood for since its inauguration in 1989.

Jai Parasram Toronto, 05 Jan. 2010