Why are these apologists not interested in a thorough investigation of the past?
Dear Editor,
Ryhaan Shah and overseas Guyanese’s sudden awakening and dramatic media obsession with Guyana’s pre-1992 era is rather coincidental with PPP’s fledging campaign material.
Having known of Ms. Shah’s past work with NCN for a number of years with the PPP government I am not surprised at her stance. Most of PPP’s campaign material is an invocation of the ills associated with the 1960s, 70s period for which there has been very little account of who is culpable.
What is perhaps most noticeably missing from Ms. Shah’s analysis, to make it balanced, is the post 1992 period which saw similar rights of Guyanese transgressed. For the PPP and the Ms. Shahs, it is as if what the PNC supposedly did in the past justifies the PPP disasters.
I could list the litany of destructive incidents which occurred in these now two demarcated periods, but it would take more than a bale of toilet paper. For too long politicians and so-called independent voices have exploited both periods with baseless lies. Little has been presented in the form of well documented information to provide for a honest discussion.
Missing is an honest independent review of the past which could allay past fears and clear up doubts and speculation which are now on the table. Hiding past information is not in the interest of both young and old, since many older folks also make ill-informed decisions based on the sketchy information of our history. Perhaps these analysts prefer not to have the past properly documented, since they could control the content to suit their own interest.
Recognizing our troubled past has been very difficult for both parties, at this point both feel looking backwards would be political suicide. The PNC’s past has perhaps been more widely documented, owing to the PPP’s reflexive campaign strategy and therefore mostly told through the lens of the PPP.
What is missing are independent eyes examining the past, and perhaps to what extent the PPP has been culpable of troubles prior to 1992. Post-1992 PPP’s governance has been a myriad of scandals, beginning with the stone scam to the Agricola protests, the unknown post-elections violence, the Marriot, and Skeldon debacles, but one should also examine whether the PNC are also to be blamed during this period.
Sometime in 2009, then leader of the opposition, Robert Corbin, called for an inquiry into the past mayhems, going back from 1992 to present! The PNC led an opposition motion in Parliament for such an inquiry to be held. Civil society, then Chairman of the Private Sector Commission, Gerry Gouveia, all supported this call. What was shocking, apart from the killings of young people which occurred in 2004, this phase included the periods of post-1992 elections, post-1997 elections violence, the jail-break and Buxton ‘uprising’ of 2002, periods in which it is widely felt had a PNC flavour about it.
So it begs the question why would the PNC be willing to have such an investigation, which could potentially find them culpable? But, lo and behold, it was the PPP which has been in power for over 20 years, which failed to launch such an inquiry.
Why then is the PPP afraid to launch an inquiry which could unearth the devils in the post-1992 era and maybe find their main rival, the PNC, in a potentially weakened position? Have the PPP also been involved in something sinister?
When David Granger repeated this call of his predecessor to inquire into the past, Khemraj Ramjattan sought to have the time period extended to include 1964 to 1992.
That would have ensured a complete inquiry of Guyana historical ills. However, this again fell on deaf ears; although one thinks the PPP would be extremely happy to have pre-1992 investigated. But, shockingly, once again the PPP refused to budge, and instead singled out one moment in history, the death of Walter Rodney, to have an inquiry.
Why then would the PPP seek to exclude the periods 1964 to 1978, and 1980 to 1992? What are they afraid of? For the PPP to refuse to inquire into the past suggests the PPP is equally culpable of what transpired before 1992. The Walter Rodney inquiry, for which the PPP may have had its own motive, is perhaps the best example so far, of what we believe to be true may not be true!
It took the PPP 23 years to set up an inquiry into one incident of the past, the Walter Rodney inquiry. My perception of who killed him has certainly changed. I was 100% certain the PNC did it, but now it has become less clear who was responsible. The theory of an accidental killing never crossed my mind and as such opened my mind to all possibilities, could it have been a job of foreign interest not keen on having the Cold war further destabilised?
These inquires are very useful in highlighting missing details which so many analysts and politicians currently seek to exploit. AFC-APNU coalition should set up an independent commission of inquiry, similar to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission established in South Africa, into the past 50 years from 1964, to remove speculation and political exploitation.
Latchman Singh