Skip to main content

April 1 2018

Source

Dear Editor,

Some elected officials either don’t care or are forgetting we are living in an era where information is easily retrievable and transmitted. No amount of denying, as happened this past week by the coalition leaders, can erase the public admission by one of its senior members that Cabinet raised the issue of David Hinds and my own columns in the Guyana Chronicle. It’s a fact some members of the Cabinet, ie the senior ranking, were calling for the columns to be removed, expressing angst they were still be being carried, and insisting a way must be found to stop them.

There is no secret that at the 14th January media brunch, hosted by President Granger at the State House, the ‘Eye on Guyana’ column was singled out for attention. One of my articles, ‘Govt lacks testicular fortitude to contain Russia, it will be worse with ExxonMobil’ (10th December 2017), was used as reference for what must not grace the Chronicle pages. Shortly after, this article was removed from the paper’s online edition.

The notion that Prime Minister Nagamootoo being in recovery and away from office is absent from political participation and decision-making does not hold.  His presence continues to be felt via his weekly column in Chronicle and due to his portfolio in government he would remain involved.

Accusations that criticism of the government was bad or tantamount to biting the hands that feed you ignore the fact that 1) the people own the state media, not the government; 2) there is yet to be proven/shown that any of my criticism was untruthful. The fact government may be uncomfortable having a mirror placed in its face by the people who elected them to represent, advance, and safeguard their interest, and are paying them to do so is not deficiency on the people’s part.

Anil Nandall, former PPP/C appointed Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs now shadow minister, has since weighed in on the Chronicle issue and the role of the government in our termination. Refer to ‘Schisms in the coalition will only get larger’ (SN, March 30).  His rendering is a classic case of ‘iron pot calling the kettle black,’ though the coalition must take responsibility for creating such an atmosphere.

To cite me as a “relentless critic of the PPP and ally of the government who deluded himself into believing that he can be critical of a PNC government in the Chronicle,” and would have had to go given that the coalition’s “authoritarianism brooks no criticism,” is a revelation of the debased nature of political thinking of which the PPP/C cannot claim innocence.

Though the coalition when in opposition rightly condemned the PPP/C government for silencing voices of critique, dissent and alternative views in the people’s media, acceptance now of similar treatment by the coalition government is not a function of politics but that of personalities. The state-owned media were used as hatchets against the people, driving wedges in the society. Yours truly was not allowed access, including the right to respond to those who wrote about me.  This double standard the people must not support for it retards us and society’s development. If it was wrong under the PPP/C it cannot be right under the APNU+AFC.

The internal political working of the coalition members is for them to resolve, providing such does not violate the Constitution and Laws of Guyana. But even as Nandlall highlights treatment of smaller members in the group he ignores that the Civic component of the PPP in government fared no better. One of its earliest members, who was disposed of, is on public record speaking of the loose arrangement of that alliance, which was nurtured and allowed by the PPP in order to miniaturise, sideline and ignore what was said to be an amorphous group.

Neither the PPP/C nor the APNU+AFC coalition can point a finger of purity to the other, though in principle there is support for members of this coalition to earn and demand their rightful place at the table.  There must be political maturity and growth in our politics.

The Member of Parliament needs to be reminded that support for any government or opposition is not hinged on blind loyalty but on adherence to universally acceptable principles that would see the realisation of good governance through respect for the rule of law, citizens/workers’ rights and freedoms, public accountability, and sound policies and programmes that would bring about equity, justice and fair play in the society.

There is no delusion on my part. There is belief in the equality of man and the capacity of man to act towards each other with reason and conscience. The benefit of the doubt will always be given until proven otherwise. Support or non-support are contingent on these. To brand me pro-government and anti-PPP but still witness my voice being raised against issues I consider reckless and inappropriate by this administration which I asked people to elect in May 2015, demonstrates an absence of blind loyalty or silence in the fact of violations or transgressions. This ought to serve as lesson that all shall be held accountable by me, as citizen and leader.

The claim that the administration in engaging in “vulgar disregard for the Constitution and crass undemocratic actions” since 2015 truthfully is not without some merit. Laws, rules, conventions, declarations and charters are not made to be cherry-picked, but respected in their entirety. When this government continues the practice of cherry-picking, Nandlall’s accusation will find fertile ground. At the same time neither he nor the PPP/C can claim moral authority as the nation witnessed that government’s flagrant disregard for the rule of law, rights and freedoms; and the plundering of the nation’s resources for the benefit of a clique.

I close by borrowing Nandlall’s use of George Santayana’s admonition that, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Truer words could not have been spoken. The things the people condemned with the PPP/C management of our government we must not now accept from the APNU+AFC. Whenever ugly signs, acts or actions raise their heads we must nip them in the bud!

Yours faithfully,

Lincoln Lewis

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Schisms in the coalition will only get larger.

March 30 2018

Source

Dear Editor,

Long before it assumed the reins of government, I have argued that the authoritarianism which permeates the ideology and realpolitik of the People’s National Congress (PNC) would prevent it from co-existing amicably or equitably in any coalition. This is so because authoritarianism by its very nature and definition seeks domination, if not monopoly, over power at the expense of democratic notions, principles and processes.

Many felt that its long exile in opposition along with its ostensible attempts at ‘reform’ would have allowed introspection and consequently, a democratized PNC would have emerged. There is an overwhelming volume of evidence available from its performance in government since 2015, that would establish beyond doubt that this grouping of persons are hopelessly wrong. I have repeatedly highlighted and documented a constellation of instances and incidents of naked authoritarianism, vulgar disregard for the Constitution and crass undemocratic actions by the PNC in government since 2015.

Therefore, for me, it was always clear that the coalition would not work in the manner contemplated by the coalition partners, other than the PNC. I always knew that the PNC would dominate the coalition at all costs, and all pre-coalition accords and agreements would be rendered as meaningless as the paper upon which they are scribed. And, so it has been since May 2015, getting progressively worse with each passing year. Unsurprisingly, in less than three years, the Alliance For Change (AFC) and its leaders have been reduced to virtual political rubber stamps, and the other major coalition partner, the Working People’s Alliance (WPA), is currently, publicly, speculating whether they should continue to remain in the coalition. The representatives of the tiny Justice For All Party (JFAP) and the National Front Alliance (NFA) have been reduced to nothing more than moot back-benchers in Parliament, with ministerial portfolios that are devoid of any serious functional responsibilities.

Firstly, it is public knowledge that Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo has been overseas on medical leave for over a month. By virtue of the Cum-mingsburg Accord, the prime ministerial portfolio was assigned to the AFC. One would have expected that in accordance with the letter and spirit of that Accord, if the AFC’s designated person, in this case, Mr Nagamootoo, is unable to act as prime minister, then another AFC person ought to have been appointed to act in his stead. That person should be Mr Khemraj Ramjattan, the second highest-ranking member of the AFC in the coalition government. How-ever, this has not been the case. Mr Carl Greenidge has been appointed to act as prime minister, and only in Mr Greenidge’s absence, was Mr Ramjattan appointed to act as prime minister.

I am cognizant of the fact that the argument which would be quickly advanced, is that the second Vice President must be accorded priority over the third Vice President, to act as prime minister. This argument would only be attractive to the apologists. In the absence of the substantive prime minister, the Constitution gives the president free rein to appoint any minister to act in that office. The PNC was quick to invoke the Constitution in denying Mr Nagamootoo chairmanship of the Cabinet, as was agreed upon in the Cummingsburg Accord. That very Constitution can now be used to ensure compliance with the Cummingsburg Accord, so that Mr Ramjattan can be appointed by the president to act as prime minister in the absence of Mr Nagamootoo and there will be no constitutional hurdle to overcome. However, the authoritarian nature of the PNC dictates that it dominates every available political space in the coalition. The AFC has been so politically degutted that they cannot muster the courage to even whimper in protest.

Secondly, the AFC candidate for deputy mayor of the City of Georgetown was not even permitted to enter into the elections to contest the position a week ago. The PNC Councillors used their majority to close nominations after a PNC Councillor was nominated for the position of deputy mayor. This shameless grab for total power by the PNC at City Hall, was witnessed by former AFC General Secretary, David Patterson.  A few days thereafter, the AFC leader, Raphael Trotman, jetted off with the President to attend a Water Conference in Brazil, which appears to be wholly unconnected to his ministerial portfolio.

Thirdly, as if Dr Rupert Roopnaraine’s demotion from Minister of Education to the head of some nondescript department within the government bureaucracy on the death anniversary of Dr Walter Rodney was not enough, two weeks ago, we witnessed the vulgar expulsion of the WPA’s second most prominent leader, Dr David Hinds, from the Chronicle newspaper as a weekly columnist. Dr Hinds’s writings were acidly critical of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) and comparably, mildly critical of the government. However, authoritarianism brooks no criticism. So, Dr Hinds had to go. So did Mr Lincoln Lewis, another relentless critic of the PPP and ally of the government, who deluded himself into believing that he can be critical of a PNC government in the Chronicle.

For several months, the WPA leadership has been complaining publicly about the contempt with which they have been treated by the PNC in government. They are now, publicly, considering whether they should continue to be part of the coalition. The WPA comes from a rich history and legacy of struggle against the PNC dictatorship of the ʼ70s and ʼ80s. Their founder, Dr Walter Rodney, paid the ultimate price. Many of them, including Drs Hinds and Roopnaraine, were brutalized, shot at and wrongfully imprisoned during those years. Why they now express surprise at the treatment meted out to them by the same PNC must be bewildering to the average Guyanese, equipped with the historical facts. It is reminiscent of the fable of the frog and the scorpion crossing the river. But, I suppose ethnicity and politics trumped reason, principles and historical experience.

In closing, I cannot help but recollect the famous words of George Santayana, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”. As for the coalition, the schisms to which I have alluded will only get larger with each passing day. It is the natural order of things. Even Freddie Kissoon has grudgingly conceded that we are witnessing the “creeping dictatorship.”

Yours faithfully,
Mohabir Anil Nandlall, MP

Django

Anil Nandlall and the GNI Robb Street chorus need to tell us why during 23 years of PPP control of the Chronicle they never published critical voices such as Hinds and Lewis

190 proof hypocrites

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Baseman posted:

Both wutliss!!!

PNC more wutliss, they promised the star and moon and delivered a Big  Yellow Katahar. I should go and dig out their election manifesto for all to see.

They are sitting down like a bunch of clueless clowns waiting for aile money.

FM
Last edited by Former Member

"Anil Nandall, former PPP/C appointed Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs now shadow minister, has since weighed in on the Chronicle issue and the role of the government in our termination. Refer to ‘Schisms in the coalition will only get larger’ (SN, March 30).  His rendering is a classic case of ‘iron pot calling the kettle black,’ though the coalition must take responsibility for creating such an atmosphere.

To cite me as a “relentless critic of the PPP and ally of the government who deluded himself into believing that he can be critical of a PNC government in the Chronicle,” and would have had to go given that the coalition’s “authoritarianism brooks no criticism,” is a revelation of the debased nature of political thinking of which the PPP/C cannot claim innocence.

Though the coalition when in opposition rightly condemned the PPP/C government for silencing voices of critique, dissent and alternative views in the people’s media, acceptance now of similar treatment by the coalition government is not a function of politics but that of personalities. The state-owned media were used as hatchets against the people, driving wedges in the society. Yours truly was not allowed access, including the right to respond to those who wrote about me.  This double standard the people must not support for it retards us and society’s development. If it was wrong under the PPP/C it cannot be right under the APNU+AFC."

FM
Last edited by Former Member

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×