Preliminary recount results this week indicate that the ruling party’s victory in March’s pivotal presidential election was fraudulently inflated – likely returning Guyana to the opposition’s control for the gilded years ahead. What happened, and what comes next?

Guyana’s presidential election in March of this year was intensely contested, as the country faces an existential inflection point for the shape of its future. At stake is discretionary control over earnings from Guyana’s recently-discovered petroleum reserves, which the ExxonMobil-led consortium officially began pumping in December 2019. Estimates cite Guyana’s vast offshore oil and gas reserves at around 8bn barrels (among the top 20 globally), and the government’s oil earnings may total up to $30bn by 2030, with $168bn over the lifetime of the project. Guyana is set to become one of the richest countries in South America.

Prior to this year’s election, President David Granger’s A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) + Alliance for Change (AFC) coalition led the government since 2015, winning power from the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C). Guyanese politics are effectively divided along racial lines, with the APNU primarily representing Afro-Guyanese, who make up around 30% of Guyana’s population, and the PPP/C mostly representing Indo-Guyanese, who account for around 40%.

Polarized politics

The PPP/C and the APNU – with its junior coalition partner AFC – have effectively maintained a duopoly over Guyanese politics. The PPP/C governed Guyana for 23 years until 2015, when the APNU+ALC won 33 of the National Assembly’s 65 seats – a one seat majority. The PPP/C’s stint in government was perceived as corrupt and racially divisive by many Afro-Guyanese, while the APNU+AFC coalition has sought to promote more racial diversity.

The 2020 elections were triggered by a vote of no confidence in Granger’s government in December 2018, when Charrandas Persaud, an MP in the ruling coalition, defected and ended the government’s majority. Although the constitution stipulates that elections must be held within three months, Granger sought to delay as long as possible by challenging the no confidence vote in court, thereby sowing further polarization and distrust among the opposition.

The stakes for the elections could not have been higher, with the incoming government’s ability to allocate spending for the enormous incoming oil revenues likely to be decisive in maintaining power for years to come. Debate over control of Guyana’s incoming oil earnings was central in the lead-up to the elections, in particular following allegations that Granger’s government negotiated a poor deal with the ExxonMobil-led consortium, losing up to $55bn in additional revenues, according to Global Witness.

The potential for oil revenues to transform Guyanese society cannot be understated: Guyana is the second poorest country in South America and faces major structural weaknesses from poor healthcare and education systems to high rates of poverty and one of the highest emigration rates worldwide. It is in this context that the IMF has predicted that Guyana’s economy will grow by a spectacular 86% this year. Oil revenues by 2024 could lift income per capita from $5,000 to $19,000, according to The Economist. Despite recent economic stagnation – due in part to the unemployment that followed the widespread closure of sugar estates – Guyana is now poised for an economic boom.

The great electoral fiasco

Results from the elections held on March 2nd were immediately contested by domestic and international observers. US, British, Canadian, and EU governments delivered a joint statement citing legitimate concerns about electoral fraud, especially in Region 4 (which includes the capital, Georgetown). US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned that “officials who seek to benefit from electoral fraud and form illegitimate governments” could be subject to sanctions and visa revocations.

Bowing to public pressure, Granger officially agreed to a recount, but a court initially blocked the move after a member of the ruling coalition filed a suit. The injunction was subsequently thrown out, and the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) was allowed to proceed with the recount.

Amid the ensuing political crisis and the spread of Covid-19, the official recount of 2,339 ballot boxes began in May, supervised by observers from the Caribbean Community and the Organization of American States. The recount found multiple electoral irregularities in Region 4, including interruptions of ballot counting and misconduct by the region’s electoral authority.

The recount, which was completed on June 7, reported that the PPP/C under presidential candidate Irfaan Ali gained nearly 15,500 votes more than the APNU+AFC. As a result, the PPP/C would take 33 seats in the National Assembly under President Ali, while the APNU+AFC would take 31 (with one seat for the combined votes of three smaller parties). The recount thus showed that the initial results for Region 4 were inflated in favor of the APNU+AFC. As of today, GECOM has not declared the official results.

Nevertheless, there may be further obstacles ahead for Guyana’s turbulent democracy before the crisis is fully resolved: since the recount was announced, the APNU+AFC has accused the PPP/C of “high fraud” and stated that it would pursue legal action to prevent GECOM from declaring a winner.

Small country, big challenges

Guyana’s most recent election demonstrates a serious hit to democracy and sows doubts about whether either party is sufficiently responsible or adequately prepared to take control of the upcoming oil windfall. Managing Guyana’s oil resources will demand transparent, effective, and responsible governance in order to avoid turning the country into a corrupt petrostate. Promisingly, Granger’s government passed a law to create a sovereign wealth fund – the Natural Resources Fund (NRF) – for which the government would have to obey strict rules to draw from and which enhances public oversight over deposits and withdrawals. The PPP/C, however, has criticized the NRF law for giving too much power to the finance minister and has committed to replacing it immediately.

In the meantime, Guyana continues to face other serious challenges. Despite committing to a new “Green State Development Strategy,” which would allocate significant investments in renewable energy production and offsetting damage from climate change, the country faces grave environmental threats, especially as 90% of its population lives in coastal areas that are prone to flooding from increasing sea levels. The country is also at risk of increasingly strong storms and powerful rainfall.

Additionally, Guyana – with a total population of around 780,000 – is being existentially threatened by its much larger neighbor Venezuela, which has laid claim to much of Guyana’s oil reserves as well as two-thirds of its territory. Guyana has referred the case to the International Court of Justice – with public hearings to start on June 30 – but the stability and reliability of Venezuela as a negotiating partner under its current dictatorship remain very much in doubt.

The path forward

The PPP/C – as the most likely victor of the March elections – should take stock of the current political polarization, the numerous challenges Guyana faces, and the acrimony fueled by the elections to reevaluate its governing structures, values, and policies. Guyana’s future will unquestionably hinge on the effectiveness of the incoming government.

First, the PPP/C should seek to move away from the racial divisions that continue to both inhibit Guyana’s political system and promote corruption and cronyism. Ali, as the likely incoming president, should seek to form a more racially diverse cabinet that represents all Guyanese. It should avoid exacerbating racial divisions and promoting Indo-Guyanese interests, contrary to its previous stint in government. While third parties supported by the growing multiracial population as well as the indigenous population sought to break the racial divisions, they earned only one seat in the last elections. Reform must therefore come from within the two major blocs.

Second, Ali should commit to the NRF law in order to guarantee responsible and effective management of the incoming oil wealth. Governments that do not hold themselves to precise limits for spending and engage in risky borrowing can do grave damage to their economies, as evidenced by other resource-rich but corrupt states as well as states that fall victim to Dutch disease and inflation. While the NRF law may have flaws that can be amended, the danger of entirely reopening this discussion when oil revenues have already started to flow is not worth the risk.

Third, the PPP/C should focus on building institutions that will enhance Guyanese democracy and rule of law to ensure effective governance. Transparency and accountability are essential to combatting the potentially corrosive effects of corruption and misspending from the incoming oil revenues. As evidenced by the misconduct of the elections, Guyana still has a way to go to build responsible democratic institutions.

Fourth, the government must emphasize inclusive growth strategies that balance the enormous social and economic gains for the country’s population with environmental, human rights, and other considerations. Specifically, the government should use the increased revenue to improve healthcare and education systems and invest in its own population, possibly drawing upon its vast diaspora population. Guyana must invest in renewable energy production and build protections for vulnerable communities on the coast.

Guyana currently stands at a major crossroads in setting the course for its future. When the dust finally settles from the controversial recount, a reset is necessary for Guyanese democracy. While numerous ongoing challenges – from Covid-19 and climate change to Venezuela’s expansionism and the recent collapse in oil prices – may threaten Guyana’s oil earnings in the short-term, the new government has the chance now to utilize the current political chaos to build a more equitable, inclusive, and democratic future in the long-term, if it so chooses.

Patrick McGrath received his MA from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna and his BA in International Relations from Tufts University. He worked for two years in Serbia as a Project Manager at the NGO NorthStar and as a Faculty Lecturer at the State University of Novi Pazar as a recipient of a US Fulbright scholarship. He was a 2016 Think Viségrad Fellow at the Slovak Foreign Policy Association in Bratislava, Slovakia, and he completed internships at the Institute for Democracy and Mediation in Tirana, Albania and the International Centre for Policy Studies in Kyiv, Ukraine.