So it has happened at last. Moses Nagamootoo has publicly announced that he will seek, firstly, the approval of his Party, and then the people, to contest from among the leadership and membership for the PPP/C's Presidential candidature for the 2006 General Elections. President Bharrat Jagdeo who must have thought that his incumbency may have had the effect of curtailing potential challengers, now will have a fight from at least one senior, longstanding and very popular member of the P.P.P. I foresee another challenger emerging on or around that general election, who will take the fight as directly and clinically as Moses; but he will do so more from within the upper echelons and internal quarters of the party.
Knowing the sensibilities and sensitivities of the P.P.P.'s top brass, this public pronouncement made by Nagamootoo must have been as earth shattering as it was surprising. Quite frankly, even I was taken aback somewhat by this early announcement of his intention. But Moses knows best what Moses does. "Why?" some may ask. Is it that legal practice is not as profitable after all, as my good friend Khurshid Sattaur makes it out to be? I rather suspect that the motivations have to do with being the consummate political animal he is. And as the frankness and candour his answers bring out when the questions were asked by Mr. Yesu Persaud, he is indeed concerned about the dramatic loss of momentum in getting us to the promised land. This concern I should mention is not only his, but a huge one within the rank and file of the party.
The P.P.P., notwithstanding the profundity of its politics, the vastness and depth of its struggles, the brilliant leaders it produced, the immeasurable experience it has gained through its participation in national and international activities, always seemed weak-kneed and nervous when leadership challenges emerge, or even when proposals are genuinely made to institutionalise a method which is direct, broad-based and democratic to elect its senior leaders and top candidates for national posts.
As is well known, the Section K Campbellville's proposals at the last Port Mourant Congress included exactly such a proposal i.e. that at the Congress nearest to a general election, there should be a presentation of candidates willing to run for the party's presidential candidature, and an election thereafter by the voting members at Congress after a process of campaigning which will have to follow certain guidelines set in a Code of Conduct. This kind of endorsement by this larger body of the successful candidate is by far a superior method than the autocratic one which I can only describe as the "Pa seh Ma, Ma seh Ba and membership suppose to seh Yeah" method.
It is now history what happened to Section K's proposal. Through a 'democratic process', it was ripped to shreds.
Now how will the emergence of this actual challenge for leadership be dealt with? The proposed procedures which the far-seeing members of the Section K Group wanted constitutionalised in the Party's Constitution, or some such modified acceptable version, may very well come in handy.
The creation of institutions, structures and procedures for resolving challenges, disputes and controversies of this kind and type is necessary. As was argued by one of the authors of the Section K's proposal, we must not seek to build our shelters when the rain commences pouring; we must do so always in good time because we know that one day it will rain.
Or was it a case where it was never anticipated or expected that leadership challenges will ever come to the fore? Well, I want to believe that this rather dumb approach was not the consideration. Leadership challenges in a large national party as the P.P.P, is as sure as the rains. It is human nature to want to present oneself to contest for the country's top position. And there is absolutely nothing wrong or illegal about wanting to do so.
What will obviously be wrong, however, is a mud-slinging festival. I only pray that Moses is not propagandised as a "nemakharam" by those who feel he ought not to have done as he did. Tendering oneself for the country's top position, through the vehicle of one's political party, is a noble honourable thing to do. And doing so in good time so that the pitch can be prepared for the bouncers and straight drives, is being very reasonable to all concerned - team-players, critics, members and supporters and the larger electorate.
When the match will have been played, whosoever emerges the winner every party man and woman must respect and thereafter support unflinchingly.
I simply wish to conclude that I learnt somewhere that the democratic method, at a national level, involves two basic dimensions: Contest-ation and participation, where the most powerful collective decision-makers are selected through fair honest periodic elections in which candidates freely compete for votes and in which virtually all the adult population is eligible to vote.
These two attributes at a party level are also very applicable. By a leadership challenge, there is contestation. And as for participation, quite frankly, I would like to have my say by participating in a fair, honest election to decide the winner of this challenge.
My party and country deserves such a development. We will all grow wiser and stronger as a result of this learning of how to deal with the unprecedented and the uncharted.