| The enigma that’s AFC : --a party of conundrums and conflicts |  |  |  |
Written by Mohabir Anil Nandlall |
| Saturday, 17 August 2013 23:42 |
FROM its conception, and by its name, the Alliance For Change professes to be the political movement to catalyze change in Guyana’s political landscape. A common thread which runs throughout almost all of its public pronouncements is that it advocates for a high standard of political morality.
“Transparent government”, “accountability in public office” and high decorum from public officials have all been ideals espoused by this party. Indeed, these are ideals for which all political parties ought to protagonise. But none has done it as empathic as the A.F.C.
Equally, none has failed more abysmally to practise what it preaches than the A.F.C. In this article, I will chronicle just a few examples to support my hypothesis.
Nagamootoo and N.I.C.I.L.
From the inception, A.F.C. has been critical of N.I.C.I.L., accusing it of innumerable financial irregularities, lack of transparency and accountability in its operations, and much more.
In the elections campaign of 2011, N.I.C.I.L has been a focus of theirs with all the leaders, including Moses Nagamootoo, castigating and denigrating the work and functions of N.I.C.I.L. After the elections, and in Parliament, they continued to be critical of N.I.C.I.L. in their presentations.
In the press, the onslaught persisted. Not once, however, was it disclosed to the unsuspecting public that Mr. Moses Nagamootoo, the Vice-Chairman of the Alliance For Change and one of its Members of Parliament, was a lawyer retained by N.I.C.I.L., and that he had actually received almost $7 million in legal fees from this very organisation which they describe as being so corrupt.
It was only after I disclosed this information in a debate in Parliament National Assembly did it become public. To date, no member of the Alliance For Change has denounced this patent conflict of interest and political hypocrisy.
Pension and prevarications:
The pension and other facilities to which former President Jagdeo is entitled, by law, has evoked tremendous controversy. The fact that this Law was simply a codification of the benefits which all former Presidents enjoyed was simply ignored. The issue was propagandized to its fullest. The most prolific crusader against it was Mr. Moses Nagamootoo; he spoke at length about it during the elections campaign, at public meetings, rallies, in the newspapers, and on television. To quote him, “It rattled my soul.”
Not once did he disclose that when that very Law was passed in Parliament, he voted in support of it. In-fact, from all his utterances, he deliberately conveyed the impression that he voted against it. It was only after I produced the Hansard, during one of my presentations in Parliament, and revealed that he voted in support of it, was that information made public.
Indeed, seconds before I read from the Hansard, which, obviously, he didn’t realize I was about to do, his bold assertion was, “I never voted for it.” Again, the AFC has offered no apology to the public for this blatant prevarication.
Meridien and Marriott:
The disclosure that a Marriott Hotel will be built in Guyana was made early in the year 2011. Indeed, a few months prior to the November 2011 elections, there was a public sod-turning event at the proposed site, which was published in all the newspapers, and aired on television. No public criticism came from the A.F.C.
As the elections were approaching, Robert Badal, the owner of the Pegasus Hotel, made public his association with the A.F.C. I have no doubt that this association came with great financial benefits.
It is not rocket science for anyone to quickly realize that a Marriott Hotel, in close proximity to the Pegasus Hotel, would pose significant competition in that realm of the hotel industry in which the Pegasus Hotel enjoys an almost absolute monopoly.
Almost immediately after Badal’s association with the A.F.C. was consummated, the party launched a sustained and vitriolic campaign against every aspect of the Marriott Hotel project, casting every conceivable reason as a basis for it to not materialize. But again, not for one moment during this sustained attack did the A.F.C. disclose, or even concede, that the party has a close and politically consanguine relationship with the Pegasus Hotel.
Specialty Hospital and Special Interests:
The establishment in Guyana of a specialty hospital of the kind conceived to be constructed at Lilliandal, East Coast Demarara, in the ordinary course of things, cannot be opposed by a sane mind. Expectedly, there was no known objection emanating from the Alliance for Change, initially.
However, the objections to and criticisms of the project came in an avalanche when Fedders Lloyd Inc. was disqualified from the bidding process as a non-compliant bidder. The criticisms came largely from the AFC leader himself, Mr. Khemraj Ramjattan. Not surprisingly, it became public knowledge subsequently that Fedders Lloyd Inc. is his client. Again, no one in the AFC sees the conflict. At least, they have said nothing publicly about it.
Cathy and Consultancy:
It is now public knowledge that Ms. Cathy Hughes, an Executive Member and Member of Parliament for the Alliance For Change, owns a Public Relations company. This company was retained by the Sithe Global Group to do public relations work when the Amaila Falls Hydro-project received its first bout of criticisms. The chief critic again was her party, the Alliance For Change.
I disclosed this conflict of interest situation publicly on two occasions. Both times, I received letters from Mr. Nigel Hughes, her husband, Chairman of the A.F.C. and Company Secretary for Amaila Hydroelectric Project Inc. (AHEPI) demanding a retraction. I ignored both. It is obvious that the rank incest which contaminates these associations is oblivious to the AFC.
Hughes and Hydro:
I have no doubt that the disclosure that Mr. Nigel Hughes functioned simultaneously as chairman for the Alliance For Change and the Company Secretary for Amaila Hydroelectric Project Inc. is a shock from which many have not yet recovered. His decision to resign from the party rather than the company must have bewildered his supporters more than anything else. The fact that his leader disclaims knowledge of his dual role speaks volumes. To whom did he make his alleged disclosure that he is the company secretary for Amaila Hydro Electric Project Inc. when his leader is unaware, is indeed a million dollar question. Certainly, the disclosure was not made public and only that could have possibly dissipated the impregnable conflict of interest which he eventually admitted. Alas, this public disclosure is almost four years late.
A Foreman’s furor:
Those who are still recovering from the Amaila Hydro Electric Project Inc. conflict of interest debacle were dealt another blow when it was disclosed that Mr. Nigel Hughes had a lawyer/client relationship which lasted some six years with the foreman of the jury in the just concluded Lusignan massacre murder trial. In this case, the Judge embarked upon an exceptional procedure and specifically enquired from each juror, in the presence of all the lawyers, whether they had any relationship of any kind with any of the lawyers. The disclosure of this previous lawyer/client relationship came from neither the juror nor the lawyer.
The information about this relationship became public only after the trial. The juror has since admitted the relationship and was banned for life from ever serving on a jury. No such admission has come from Mr. Hughes. The case lasted six years. All the court documents were signed by the same lawyer. Only that lawyer appeared at the trial of the case. I draw no inference. I leave that to you.
