GUYANA has recently been rocked by some startling revelations that have changed the public’s view of the Alliance For Change(AFC) and its leadership forever.  These revelations concern two very tragic events in Guyana, one literally and one figuratively.

The AFC has been accusing the government and the PPP/C of all sorts of improprieties in their conduct of government’s business. From their accusations it would appear that anyone, no matter how remotely connected they are to anyone in the government or the PPP/C, should not in any way benefit from any government initiatives.

While this could be a hard-and-fast rule for countries of large populations such as the USA, Guyana is a very small society and therefore connections and inferences can always be made.  But are members of the Opposition exempted?
The gross hypocrisy of the AFC has once again been exposed. Mr. Nigel Hughes, a practising lawyer of many years, an aspiring senior counsel and President of Guyana has to now accept that these aspirations of his will never materialise. His blunder in relation to the Amaila Hydro Electric Project proves that he cannot be trusted.  He is now a public disgrace in the eyes of his colleagues and a liability to the AFC.  
But if anyone thinks that his conflict of interest position with the  Amaila Hydro Project is damaging, then consider his defence of one of the accused in the Lusignan massacre murder trial, and his gross misconduct in that trial.
From what has been reported, most Guyanese including yours truly, believe that the murder accused was found not guilty, thanks to Mr. Hughes’s gross misconduct.  Mr. Hughes is claiming that he cannot remember having a lawyer/client relationship with the foreman of the jury, a relationship that lasted six years. Why do these guys think that they can continue to insult the intelligence of Guyanese?
Now, amnesia, especially convenient amnesia, is one disease that is incompatible with the legal profession.  No lawyer suffering from this dreaded disease should ever be allowed to practise law just as how a doctor suffering from Parkinson’s Disease is not allowed to conduct surgery. I recommend that the Guyana Bar Association look to the medical profession for some guidance in professional ethics and conduct.
This recent, convenient amnesia of Mr. Hughes has resulted in what I believe to be the greatest miscarriage of justice ever in Guyana.  The nation was shocked when the jury returned a not guilty verdict for two men who, to every sane Guyanese were proven guilty of murdering 11 people, including five innocent children, some of whom were sleeping. How this could be, we all wondered, but it all became clear when it was revealed that both the foreman and Mr. Hughes failed to disclose to the judge that they had a six-year lawyer/client relationship. The pieces then began to fall into place and the legal profession in the entire Commonwealth looked on with dismay and disbelief that one of their most respected and competent criminal advocates suffered an episode of convenient amnesia.
 The door is now wide open for all manner of speculations as to the true reason for this convenient amnesia that Mr. Hughes and Vernon Griffith (the jury foreman) suffered simultaneously and in the presence of each other.
There is also  another important question, the answer to which most Guyanese find extremely puzzling to answer: why the chairman of a major political party, a person who is aspiring to be the president of a country, chose to defend a criminal who is accused of cold-bloodedly murdering innocent women and children just because they belong to a particular ethnicity? It is not that he had no choice. For him to say that it is his professional duty is to insult the intelligence of Guyanese.  Lawyers, unlike medical doctors, do have a choice.  What could have motivated Hughes to defend a criminal accused of committing hideous crimes against women and children, victims who were chosen based on their ethnicity in a multi-racial society, a society he is aspiring to lead?  The result of all of this is that Mr. Hughes is now ‘damaged property’.
Personally, I think his chance at silk has all but disappeared, his credibility as a national leader has evaporated and his professionalism has been eroded for life.  With regard to the AFC, he is now a liability and the party may never recover from the damage caused by Hughes.  But where does all of this leave Mr. Moses Nagamootoo? Remember, he and Nigel Hughes have been side-lining Ramjattan!
 Ramjattan must be smiling, but then the damage has been done and there seems nothing to smile about.