Controversy Brews Over New Political Party’s Use of National Symbol
By Tiana Cole | HGP Nightly News
Just hours after announcing the formation of his political party “We Invest in Nationhood (WIN),” presidential hopeful Azadin Muhammad is already facing criticism—this time over his party’s use of Guyana’s national animal, the jaguar, as its official symbol.
The newly launched party, stylized as WIN and branded in blue, black, and white, unveiled the jaguar emblem alongside its platform, intended to represent strength, nation-building, and resilience. But the move has sparked backlash, particularly from Foreign Secretary and Chairman of the National Protected Areas Commission, Robert Persaud.
In a Facebook post, Persaud described the use of the jaguar in a partisan context as deeply problematic.
“They [national symbols] reflect our shared history, culture, and pride. Using them for political purposes undermines their meaning and divides the very people they’re meant to unite,” he wrote.
Persaud emphasized that the jaguar, long considered a symbol of national strength and unity, should remain above party politics.
“Turning it into a party logo strips it of that shared meaning and attempts to make it something small, partisan, and exclusive,” he added.
While this is not the first instance of political parties leveraging national imagery, the criticism revives an old debate. In the early 2000s, the Rise Organize And Rebuild (ROAR) Party used a rampant jaguar overlaid on the map of Guyana. During the 2020 elections, the Citizenship Initiative (TCI) adopted the Victoria lily—Guyana’s national flower—as its emblem.
Despite the controversy, Muhammad appears undeterred. On May 27, he officially declared his candidacy for the 2025 General and Regional Elections, promising a new brand of leadership aimed at unifying and modernizing Guyana. However, analysts predict increased scrutiny from the incumbent People’s Progressive Party Civic (PPPC), especially as the elections draw nearer.
As the debate continues, the broader question remains: Should national symbols be fair game in politics, or are they sacred representations of shared identity?
