DOCSLIB.ORG

Leadership and Policy Studies Global Leaders: Defining

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Leadership and Policy Studies Global Leaders: Defining LEADERSHIP AND POLICY STUDIES GLOBAL LEADERS: DEFINING RELEVANT LEADERSHIP FOR THE 21ST CENTURY BRADLEY STEVEN GRAY Dissertation under the direction of Professor Robert L. Crowson After an age of leadership defined by the norms and demands of an industrial era, the forces of globalization at the beginning of the 21st century, primarily ushered in by logarithmic advances of technology, have created the demand for leadership, identified in this phenomenological study as “global leadership.” Based upon demand identifiers describing the realities of the current stage(s) of globalization–bypass, simultaneity, mobility, pluralism, change, and integration–six leadership capacities were extrapolated to establish criteria upon which to analyze an effective leader in this context. Foundational is a distinction between “competencies” and “capacities” in global leadership. Where competencies are skill and task based with limited ability to fulfill adaptive work, capacities are skills and abilities that enable one to regenerate growth based on adaptive challenges, and thus innovation. The six global leader capacities forming the filter for analysis are the capacity for self-transformation, capacity of the contextual self, capacity for omnicompetence, capacity for reframing the gifts of leadership, capacity for ethnorelativism, and the capacity for transcendence. In the case of the global leader, these six capacities engage simultaneously to create the synergistic phenomenon. Two archetypal cases are considered. Findings identify that global leaders are found throughout societies although few of them are noticed because the infrastructure of leadership development, including the education systems, are geared to develop leaders for industrial model work. Global leaders are not necessarily international leaders, and it is not a contradiction for a global leader not to lead in an international context. A corollary relationship between pairs of the criteria capacities surfaces as three interacting systems: problem solving system, motivation leadership system, and transcendent leadership system, a sophisticated relationship of behaviors. Most useful are the six criteria and their systemic, integrated engagement in the global leader as these are viable as units of development. The study identifies a developmental process, and a developmental model that applies across sectors of work, ethnic, and national backgrounds. Global leadership is a human phenomenon, not confined to sector of work, geography, or other limiting boundaries, real or created. Approved: Robert L. Crowson Date: November 6, 2006 GLOBAL LEADERS: DEFINING RELEVANT LEADERSHIP FOR THE 21ST CENTURY By Bradley Steven Gray Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Vanderbilt University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Leadership and Policy Studies December, 2006 Nashville, Tennessee Approved: Robert L. Crowson Terry E. Deal Patricia H. Arnold Kassie Freeman Copyright © 2006 by Bradley Steven Gray All Rights Reserved To Hunter, who makes all things possible for me, and whose life is my best teacher about global leadership and its development. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Although writing a dissertation is the work of an individual, every dissertation is the investment of so many persons for the achievement of the one. This dissertation is no exception, an effort I would have never accomplished without their many contributions, their patience, their unwavering encouragement, and their consistent practical and personal support. I owe a lifetime of gratitude to Hunter for the often quiet, kind, and palpable encouragement for me to finish this work.. He made many sacrifices to ensure that I was successful. It is my hope that his efforts and kindness will be rewarded with benefits that this work might produce for him and the world. I am forever grateful. I could not have achieved this goal had it not been for my parents, William H. Gray and Pinky Gray. Each of them, in their own way, and at the most strategic of moments, were interested in the research, in my well being as I moved along, and created a gentle but sufficient tension to keep me moving productively forward. Most of all they believed in me when I needed it the most and were much too generous with their bragging; I didn’t deserve it all, but it helped me make it. My sister Anna was in the background providing the same encouragement and support for which I am grateful. It is my dissertation committee to whom I am appreciative and indebted for bringing so much of this work together, their willingness to stick with me, and most imporantly their individual and collective scholarship and expertise. I am grateful to have been under the tutelage of Dr. Bob Crowson as I completed my writing. He gave me constructive, insightful advice and guidance along with an abundance of interest, support, iv and grace at the right times. Without him, this dissertation would not have been completed. I am privileged to have studied and taught along side Dr. Terry Deal. He inspired me to pursue my passion, on terms consistent with who I am, to strive for a most excellent potential. He himself models of what he speaks, and I am but one of his protégés who have benefited from the dynamic and brilliant mind and person he is. It is because of Dr. Kassie Freeman that I was able to bring together the global resources that gave my own experience grounding throughout this work. Her achievements across the globe, in the higher education community, her scholarship, and her unceasing commitment to what she calls “giving back” through her leadership made me the beneficiary of something so many would be privileged to experience. I am grateful to her. I am indebted and appreciative to Dr. Patricia Arnold for both the depth and the breadth of her guidance and influence on my research. Dr. Arnold’s background and the kindness with which she shares her brilliant mind provided some of the most insightful questions and observations that helped frame the study and its ultimate implications. There are many faculty members, administrators, and leaders who were also instrumental and pivotal. Among them, Dr, Sharon Shields with whom I had the opportunity to teach, develop the practicalities of my research, apply it in class, and make use of the results. Dr. Shields is unique among her peers and a unique treasure at Peabody College and in the Nashville community; it is because of her that I found the community implications of global leadership. Dr. Norma Stevens was catalytic in helping me see the fundamental nature of global leadership and in particular its development. In addition, she placed in front of me multiple resources that informed the concept and gave it depth. I will be forever grateful to her on so many levels, including her critical role in the v process of this work coming to completion because she also believed in me. Dr. John R. Newbrough provided both guidance and access to the Rosalyn Carter Mental Health Program and other venues at the Carter Center. I am grateful to him for his role in providing me insight and support from his considerable background in international relationships and his career as a renown educator whose social conscious has impacted hundreds of students and communities. I am grateful to Dr. Jimmy Allen for the clarity he provided early on in my research, for the way he has lived his life, and for the willingness to both participate and assist me in understanding Jimmy Carter through those who know him best. The rich lives and global leadership of Archbishop Desmond Tutu and President Jimmy Carter were made real by a group of individuals who gave unselfishly of their time to tell me their own stories in relationship to these great men. I am honored and grateful to the following individuals for their willingness to give me interviews, and in several cases, many of them: Naomi Tutu, Mpho Tutu, Thandeka Tutu, John Allen, Chris Ahrends, Matt Essau, Glenda Wildschut, and Lavinia Brown; also Bert Lance and Wayne Smith. There were two groups that provided regular and important feedback to keep me, and the focus of the research, grounded. First an informant group of professionals, who had careers in international domains and with experience in a variety of sectors. They helped refine and they validated the conceptual framework. The work would not have been the same without their global perspective, experience, expertise, and willingness to challenge and support as needed. With gratitude to Corella Ricketson, Dr. Bonita Barger, and Dr. Cindy Gause-Vega. Second, I am the last of a group of four doctoral students vi who committed to ensure that we all made it through; being the last, I am the beneficiary of all their experiences and wisdom for which I am especially grateful to Dr. Marietta Del Favero, Dr. Nathaniel Bray, and Dr. Charlene Martin-Gray. Jo Darden and Mabel Wells took on the tedious task of transcribing the voluminous and many interviews. Their contribution extends far beyond the transcriptions as they have ensured that I had their unwavering and acknowledged support and affirmation. When I needed it most and least, they were constant. Like them, Cameron Byler and Andrea Byler believed in me. Thank you is inadequate; I am profoundly grateful. My deep appreciation is also extended to Dr. Tim Frazier for his continued efforts to work along side me in several ways as the dissertation developed. He assisted me in both technical and conceptual tasks as well as developed an effective curriculum from my work to implement directly with high school students in independent schools. His professionalism, his advice, his patient demeanor, all are contributions for which I am grateful. He and Leigh Anne Frazier have been an inspiration and consistent partners in the project. I am grateful to both of them for their transparency and personal example.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Report of the Commission of Inquiry Appointed to Inquire And
    REPORT OF THE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY APPOINTED TO ENQUIRE AND REPORT ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING THE DEATH IN AN EXPLOSION OF THE LATE DR. WALTER RODNEY ON THIRTEENTH DAY OF JUNE, ONE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY AT GEORETOWN VOLUME 1: REPORT AND APPENDICES FEBRUARY 2016 Transmittal Letter Chapter 6 Contents Chapter 7 Table of Contents Chapter 8 Chapter 1 Chapter 9 Chapter 2 Tendered Exhibits Chapter 3 Procedural Rules Chapter 4 Correspondence Chapter 5 Editorial Note 1 2 Transmittal of Report of the Commission of Inquiry to enquire into and report on the circumstances surrounding the death in an explosion of the late Dr. Walter Rodney on the thirteenth day of June one thousand nine hundred and eighty at Georgetown To His Excellency David A. Granger President of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana Your Excellency, In my capacity as Chairman of the Walter Rodney Commission of Inquiry, I have the honour to submit the Report of the Inquiry to which the President appointed us by Instrument dated 8th February, 2014. The Commissioners were, in the Instrument of Appointment, expected to submit their Report within ten (10) weeks from the start of the Commission. The Commission started its work on 28th April, 2014. As we understand it, the premise informing the early submission date was that the Commission coming thirty-four (34) years after the death of Dr. Walter Rodney and the events surrounding that event, would, in all probability, be supported by only a few persons volunteering to give evidence and/or having an interest in this matter.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Justify Walter Rodney's Assassination? Rohit Kanhai Caribbean Daylight
    Groundings Volume 2 | Issue 2 Article 12 December 2015 What "Context" Can Justify Walter Rodney's Assassination? Rohit Kanhai Caribbean Daylight Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/groundings Part of the African Studies Commons, Inequality and Stratification Commons, International Relations Commons, Other International and Area Studies Commons, Politics and Social Change Commons, Race and Ethnicity Commons, and the Race, Ethnicity and Post-Colonial Studies Commons Recommended Citation Kanhai, Rohit (2015) "What "Context" Can Justify Walter Rodney's Assassination?," Groundings: Vol. 2 : Iss. 2 , Article 12. Available at: https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/groundings/vol2/iss2/12 This Walter Rodney Remembered is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@Kennesaw State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Groundings by an authorized editor of DigitalCommons@Kennesaw State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Groundings (2015) 2(2) : Page 25 What “Context” Can Justify Walter Rodney’s Assassination? Rohit Kanhai Rohit Kanhai is Editor of Caribbean Daylight, a New York-based Caribbean newspaper. Rohit Kanhai provided expert testimony at the Rodney Commission of Inquiry regarding the bomb apparatus that was used to assassinate Dr. Walter Rodney on 13 June 1980. Context! Context! Context! Like water crashing over the seawalls, there has been a rush of explanations, based on “context” to justify the shifting political sands, as it swirls with the waves. The “sands of time” seems to have shifted the “line in the sand” so much so, that all commonsense seems to have deserted the land of Guyana. In the midst of this debate are Walter Rodney and the Working People’s Alliance (WPA).
    [Show full text]
  • Guyana General and Regional Elections
    Guyana General and Regional Elections 2 March 2020 CONTENTS LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL ..................................................................... 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................... 6 CHAPTER 1 .................................................................................... 11 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................ 11 Terms of Reference .................................................................... 11 Activities ................................................................................. 12 CHAPTER 2 .................................................................................... 13 POLITICAL BACKGROUND ................................................................. 13 Context for the 2020 Elections ....................................................... 16 CHAPTER 3 .................................................................................... 20 THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND ELECTION ADMINISTRATION .......................... 20 Election Administration ............................................................... 24 Voter Eligibility and the Electoral Register ......................................... 24 Recommendations ...................................................................... 26 CHAPTER 4 .................................................................................... 28 PARTICIPATION AND INCLUSION ......................................................... 28 Gender ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Information Events & Dates On
    Parliament of Guyana HISTORICAL INFORMATION EVENTS & DATES ON THE PARLIAMENT OF GUYANA fromCompiled 1718 and Produced to 2006 by Frank A. Narain, A.A., C.C.H., Former Clerk of the National Assembly 15th January, 2007 Knowledge is of two kinds. We know a subject ourselves, or We know where we can find information on it - Samuel Johnson, English poet, critic, and lexicographer (1709-84) This copy of this File with the Historical Information on the Parliament of Guyana from 1718 to 2006 which has been Compiled and Produced By Frank A. Narain Former Clerk of the National Assembly has been Presented To …………………….…………………………..…………… ………………….……………………………..…………… With the Compliments of Frank A. Narain © 2009 Parliament of Guyana 1 PART I PRELIMINARY Contents Preface and Introduction Abbreviations used in this File Sources of Information 2 CONTENTS Part I - Preliminary 1. Preface and Introduction 11 2. Abbreviations used in this File 19 3. Sources of Information 20 Part II - Arrivals 4. The Discovery of the Country 23 5. First Arrivals and Settlers in and Ownership of the Colonies 24 Part III - Legislative Periods, Names of Legislative Bodies, First Members of Legislative Bodies, and Some Events with Dates 1718-2006 6. 1718 to 1803 The Dutch Law-Making Body – The Court of Policy 29 7. 1803 to 1928 Ownership by the British -Continuation of the Dutch Court of Policy 30 8. 1928 to 1930 British Crown Colony- The First Legislative Council of British Guiana 32 9. 1930 to 1935 The Second Legislative Council 33 10. 1935 to 1947 The Third Legislative Council 35 11. 1947 to 1953 The Fourth Legislative Council 37 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Re-Democratization in Guyana and Suriname: Critical Comparisons
    European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 84, April 2008 | 71-85 Re-democratization in Guyana and Suriname: Critical Comparisons Chaitram Singh Guyana and Suriname, two neighbouring countries on the northeast coast of South America, both re-assumed the path to democracy in the early 1990s. Guyana had from 1968 to 1992 experienced an authoritarian regime with the People’s National Congress (PNC), led by Forbes Burnham, maintaining power by rigged elections and the support of the security forces. In Suriname, the elected government of Prime Minister Henck Arron was overthrown by a military coup in 1980, only five years after independence. The military in this case chose not to govern by placing officers into the positions of president and prime minister but reserved for itself active veto powers over a predominantly civilian-staffed government until 1991. However, maintaining an authoritarian regime proved costly in both cases, and economic decline set in. The need for external aid rendered both regimes suscepti- ble to foreign pressure for a return to open party competition and free and fair elec- tions, already the subject of considerable and sustained domestic clamour in both cases. In the particular case of Suriname, an active insurgency by the country’s Maroons, while compounding the factors pushing Suriname down the economic slide and inviting international opprobrium over military excesses, convinced the military leaders that they did not have the political and social wherewithal to gov- ern effectively and that some accommodation with the established political parties was necessary. In both cases, too, the end of the Cold War and the stated goal of the United States to have a zone of democracy in this hemisphere had delegiti- mized military rule.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the OAS Electoral Observation Mission to Guyana 2001
    OEA/Ser.G CP/doc.3520/01 1 October 2001 Original: Spanish/English REPORT ON THE ELECTORAL OBSERVATION MISSION TO GUYANA 2001 This document is being distributed to the permanent missions and will be presented to the Permanent Council of the Organization. ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES WASHINGTON, D.C. THE SECRETARY GENERAL SG/UPD-682/01 September 27, 2001 Excellency: I have the honor to address Your Excellency to transmit the report on the Electoral Observation Mission to the general elections held in Guyana on March 19, 2001, and to request that you kindly arrange for its distribution to the members of the Permanent Council. Accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration. César Gaviria His Excellency Hernán R. Castro Hernández Ambassador, Permanent Representative of Costa Rica Chair of the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States Washington, D.C. ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES REPORT ELECTORAL OBSERVATION MISSION TO GUYANA 2001 Unit for the Promotion of DemocracyCONTENTS Page Acknowledgments.................................................................................................ix Introduction..........................................................................................................xi CHAPTER I. PRE-ELECTION CONTEXT .............................................................. 1 A. 1997 EOM Report 1 B. Post Election Situation in 1997 2 C. The Herdmanston Accord 2 D. CARICOM Audit of the 1997 Elections 4 E. OAS Declaration on Guyana 4 F. CARICOM Saint Lucia Statement 4 G. Constitution Reform Commission 5 H. European Union Needs Assessment ............................................... 5 I. Appointment of New Elections Commission..................................... 6 J. Postponement of Elections 6 CHAPTER II. ELECTION LAWS AND PRACTICES ................................................. 6 A. Who was to be elected? 6 B. Allocations of Seats in the National Assembly 7 C. Gender and Geography 7 D. Election Laws 7 E.
    [Show full text]
  • GUYANA 2020 Final Report
    European Union Election Observation Mission GUYANA 2020 Final Report General and Regional Elections 2 March 2020 EU EOM GUYANA GENERAL AND REGIONAL ELECTIONS 2 MARCH 2020 FINAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS I. SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 4 II. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 8 III. POLITICAL CONTEXT .................................................................................... 8 IV. LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND ELECTORAL SYSTEM ............................. 10 V. ELECTION ADMINISTRATION .................................................................. 12 VI. VOTER REGISTRATION ............................................................................... 15 VII. REGISTRATION OF CANDIDATES ............................................................ 17 VIII. CAMPAIGN ENVIRONMENT ....................................................................... 19 IX. MEDIA ............................................................................................................... 21 X. DIGITAL COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL PLATFORMS .................. 25 XI. PARTICIPATION OF WOMEN..................................................................... 27 XII. PARTICIPATION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES...................................... 28 XIII. PARTICIPATION OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES .......................... 29 XIV. POLLING, COUNTING AND TABULATION OF RESULTS ................... 30 XV. RESULTS
    [Show full text]
  • The Case of Guyana
    Munich Personal RePEc Archive Elected Oligarchy and Economic Underdevelopment: The Case of Guyana Khemraj, Tarron and Hinova, Diana New College of Florida March 2011 Online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/29733/ MPRA Paper No. 29733, posted 05 Apr 2011 17:28 UTC Elected Oligarchy and Economic Underdevelopment: The Case of Guyana Diana Hinova Graduate Student Georgetown University and Tarron Khemraj New College of Florida Caribbean Centre for Money and Finance March 2011 Abstract This study proposes the idea that Guyana’s present government can be categorized as an elected oligarchy. It highlights the existence of several binding constraints (or structural bottlenecks) and demonstrates how these constraints are exacerbated by the elected oligarchy to impair the economic development of the country. Using stylized data on economic trends, the paper illustrates the direct and indirect channels through which the elected oligarchy stifles the private sector and consequently economic progress. As such, the paper presents the elected oligarchy as an alternative channel through which private investments are crowded out by the political strategy of the state. Introduction October 5, 1992 is seen as the re-introduction of free and fair elections in Guyana. On this date, the Peoples National Congress (PNC) was displaced by the Marxist-Leninist Peoples Progressive Party (PPP) through free and fair elections sponsored by former US President Jimmy Carter. Prior to this date the PNC maintained power through rigged elections. Free and fair elections, however, do not make a liberal democracy, a concept outlined by Zakaria (1997). Indeed, the concept of democracy within the Guyanese context appears to be limited to free and fair elections1 (Wiggins, 2007; Kissoon, 2008).
    [Show full text]
  • General and Regional Elections in Guyana
    EOM/OAS ELECTORAL OBSERVATION MISSION FINAL REPORT Organization of American States GENERAL AND REGIONAL GENERAL AND REGIONAL ELECTIONS, GUYANA 2011 GENERAL AND REGIONAL ELECTIONS, GUYANA ELECTIONS IN GUYANA NOVEMBER 28, 2011 Organization of American States Secretariat for Political Affairs Department for Electoral Cooperation and Observation 17th Street & Constitution Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 Electoral Observation Missions (EOMs) USA Organization of American States (OAS) ELECTORAL OBSERVATION MISSION FINAL REPORT GENERAL AND REGIONAL ELECTIONS IN GUYANA NOVEMBER 28, 2011 General Secretariat Organization of American States José Miguel Insulza Secretary General Albert R. Ramdin Assistant Secretary General Kevin Casas-Zamora Secretary for Political Affairs Pablo Gutiérrez Director Department for Electoral Cooperation and Observation OAS Cataloging-in-Publication Data Final report of the OAS Electoral Observation Mission for the General and Regional Elections in the Republic of Guyana : November 28, 2011 / [Prepared by the Department for Electoral Cooperation and Observation]. p. ; cm. (Electoral Observations in the Americas series, no. 77) ; (OEA/Ser.D/XX SG/DCOE/II.77) ; (OEA/Ser.G CP/ doc.4800/12) ISBN 978-0-8270-5930-6 1. Elections--Guyana. 2. Election monitoring--Guyana. I. Organization of American States. Department for Electoral Cooperation and Observation. II. Series. III. Series: OEA/Ser.G CP/doc.4800/12. OEA/Ser.D/XX SG/DCOE/II.77 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.........................................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • 1 ELECTORAL CONDITIONS in GUYANA Summary of Conclusions
    ELECTORAL CONDITIONS IN GUYANA Summary of Conclusions In the 24 years since independence, massive, systematic electoral fraud has denied the Guyanese people their right to freely elect their government. Unable to express themselves politically in free and fair elections and constricted by the repressive pressures of a single, dominant party, hundreds of thousands of Guyanese have sought freedom by emigrating, principally to the United States and Canada. Today, Guyana stands at a human rights crossroads. A national election, the first in five years, must be held by March 1991. If that election is free and fair, Guyana could regain the road to political freedom and the restoration of national confidence. But a free and fair election cannot be held without fundamental changes in the deeply flawed Guyanese electoral process. The country's current electoral machinery is ideally suited for manipulation by the governing party -- an opportunity for fraud which the government has repeatedly seized. If the election is to be free and fair and perceived as such, the entire process must be opened to public scrutiny, in two fundamental ways. 1 First, the entire electoral process must be opened to international observers. Although polling agents of the opposition parties are permitted by law to observe all aspects of the voting, police and electoral officials acting at the behest of the governing party have in the past prevented these polling agents from witnessing crucial portions of the electoral process. The presence of trained and able international observers to witness every aspect of the electoral process, from the creation of the lists of voters through the balloting on election day to the final counting of the votes, is indispensable to bolster domestic monitoring efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • Document Country: Guyana
    Date Printed: 11/03/2008 JTS Box Number: lFES 4 Tab Number: 43 Document Title: Final Report, Guyana Election Assistance Project, October 1990 to November 1992 Document Date: 1992 Document Country: Guyana lFES ID: R01633 A L o N F \ o I FI::.-'f International Foundation for Election Systems M r:f) 110115th STREET, N.w.' THIRD FLOOR· WASHINGTON, D.C 20005 • (202) 8288507 • Ff>X (202) 452-O1lO4 mTI 1987 -1997 • Celebtating Ten Yem of Building Democracy Final Report GUYANA: Election Assistance Project October 1990 - November 1992 Roger Plath, Program Officer Jeff Fischer, Project Manager Henry Valentino, Project Consultant This report was made possible by a grant from the United States Agency for International Development (USAlD). Any person or organization may quote from this report is the quote is attributed to the International Foundation For Election Systems (IFES) BOARD OF DIRECTORS Barbara Boggs Victor Kamber William R. Sweeney, Jr. DIRECTORS EMERITI James M. Cannon Charles T. Manatt Patricia Hutar Oame Eugenia Charles Peter G. Kelly Leon J. Weil Chairman Secretary (Dominica) Richard M. Scammon Maureen A. Kindel Richard W. Soudriette Peter McPherson Oavid R. Jones Joseph Napolitan Judy G. Fernald President Jean-Pierre Kingsley Vice Chairman Treasurer Randal C. Teague HONORARY DIRECTOR William J. Hybl (canada) Counsel Mrs. F. Clifton White GUVANA uerton Cit~ Popula.tion Ouer 1.ee8.8BB --- Ouer see. 888 c.: Ouer lee.ee8 :." Under 188.888 188 ~: C4pital EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) played a significant role in the development of the Guyanese electoral process and the preparations for the October 5, 1992 national elections in Guyana.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovering Democracy: Problems and Solutions to the Guyana Quagmire
    Pouvoirs dans la Caraïbe Revue du CRPLC 11 | 1999 Cuba Recovering democracy: problems and solutions to the Guyana quagmire Ralph R. Premdas Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/plc/485 DOI: 10.4000/plc.485 ISSN: 2117-5209 Publisher L’Harmattan Printed version Date of publication: 1 January 1999 Number of pages: 135-173 ISSN: 1279-8657 Electronic reference Ralph R. Premdas, « Recovering democracy: problems and solutions to the Guyana quagmire », Pouvoirs dans la Caraïbe [Online], 11 | 1999, Online since 14 March 2011, connection on 19 April 2019. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/plc/485 ; DOI : 10.4000/plc.485 © Pouvoirs dans la Caraïbe Recovering democracy : problems and solutions to the Guyana quagmire by Ralph R. PREMDAS1 Professor of Public Policy University of the West Indies St. Augustine Trinidad and Tobago In 1992 when free and fair elections were conducted for the first time since 1964 in Guyana, a brief euphoric moment of positive change was simultaneously accompanied by a set of long term difficulties which five years later would return to haunt the nation reducing its democratic prospects to shambles. The Carter Center was the midwife which delivered the electoral triumph overseeing a deeply embedded proclivity of the ruling Peoples National Congress (PNC) to rig elections. While this benefitted Guyanese in restoring democracy, the change failed to alter the fundamentals of the Guyanese institutional order which in the first instance accounted for the communal strife. More specifically, the Carter people in their intense preoccupation with sanitizing the mechanical minutiae of the electoral machinery, lost sight of the perverse political institutions involving zero-sum competition for office which virtually conferred total control of the state to one community denying participation to the defeated other.
    [Show full text]