Has the AFC forgiven Nigel Hughes? PDF Print E-mail Written by FARUK MOHAMED Sunday, 15 September 2013 21:38 SINCE the revelation that foreman of the jury Vernon Griffith, acquitted the two accused in the Lusignan massacre trial, was a client of Mr. Nigel Hughes, Chairman of the Alliance For Change(AFC) for six continuous years, and that both Hughes and Mr. Griffith failed to disclose this fact to the trial judge; the AFC has failed to make any clear and unambiguous public statement on this fact. It has deliberately chosen to remain silent, hoping that it will go away. This deliberate failure on the part of the AFC to make an unambiguous public statement suggests either or both of two things. One, the AFC has brushed aside the issue as one of little or no significance or cares nothing about the public outcry. However, a closer and objective assessment leads to the conclusion that the AFC as a political party, whose entire top leadership are qualified lawyers, is simply condoning the manipulation of the courts to free criminals. In this case, the murders of 11 innocent persons, including women and small children in their sleep, all of whom were only guilty of being of Indian descent were acquitted by a jury because the foreman and Mr. Hughes suffered a bout of convenient amnesia as one letter writer put it. This fact has indeed left many lingering, but quite legitimate questions on the lips of every decent and law-abiding Guyanese. It seems to have even left the Guyana Bar Association dumbstruck, because until now it has failed to issue a statement on this outrageous and disgraceful act of one of their senior colleagues. Among the questions being asked is one that is correctly directed at the AFC. ‘Has the AFC forgiven Mr. Hughes for deliberately manipulating the court system to free the Lusignan massacre murder accused?’ If it did as it would appear, then on whose behalf or authority it did so? I am sure that those who believed the AFC’s deception and voted for it are not the ones since the majority of them have already seen its true colours. So, did the AFC seek the opinion of those whom they are claiming to represent, the public or at least their voters? What about the survivors and relatives of the victims? Did the AFC give any thought to them? It is inconceivable that the leadership of the AFC, a party that promises a new political culture in Guyana, has failed to censure one of its top leaders, its Chairman, who deliberately and shamelessly manipulated the court system to free two persons accused of the worst crime committed on peaceful citizens of this country since independence. The AFC simply have no right to forgive Nigel Hughes for this most distasteful and disgraceful act. The AFC therefore owes an unconditional public apology not only to the survivors and relatives of the Lusignan massacre victims, but also to the entire Guyanese nation for this disgraceful act of its entire leadership, who incidentally are all attorneys-at-law. Now that the AFC has publicised its code of conduct, one is left to wonder even more about what are the principles that govern this party. Does their code of conduct condone acts of manipulation of the court by its leaders to free persons accused of hideous crimes such as that of the Lusignan massacre under the guise of freedom to practise their trade? If this is so, then what is the point of having a code of conduct? The leaders of the AFC promise to be selfless in their efforts to make Guyana a better place, but it turned out that they are selfish and destroying everybody’s future.