Seecharran mixes up growing fears with groundless falsities

Aug 31, 2008 Letters

DEAR EDITOR,
Permit me to respond to Mahase Seecharran, whose letter, “Editors must refuse to publish falsities,” (Kaieteur News, August 29), sought to dismiss my concerns about the protections the Constitution affords the President of Guyana, even as there are mounting concerns about the President’s own rhetoric and actions in the local political arena.

Not once in his letter did Mr. Seecharran identify a single falsity, but wasted time repeating what we already know about Justice William Ramlal’s ruling, the constitutional protections that favour the President, and the fact that the PPP government refused to remove the said constitutional protection when it had a chance to do so a decade ago.

There is no falsity in any one of those facts.

What Mr. Seecharran has done is mixed up falsity with fears. Many Guyanese, who have been observing the President lately, have reason to fear he may be trying to take Guyana back down the path the late Forbes Burnham did. He is not quite there, yet, but he is heading in that general direction.

And it is a fear that is made all the more justifiable when we consider that the PPP, after complaining about the Burnham excesses that were excused because of the constitutional protections he enjoyed, has been taking advantage of the same protection now that it is in power.

Put fear in me once and I will blame you. Put fear in me twice and I’ll have to take the blame!

As for Mr. Seecharran’s claim that not even the PNC raised concerns over the PPP’s refusal to delete the protection clause, I don’t know how politically savvy the guy is, but commonsense would tell anyone that if the PNC inserted the clause as part of its methods of holding on to power in a political system that does not favour it because of racial voting patterns, then if the PNC plans on returning to power someday there is no way the PNC would push for removal of such a clause.

What Mr. Seecharran should have asked was: Given that the PPP will likely win elections based on racial voting, why does it still need a clause that protects its President? And the answer is simple: the PPP and PNC think alike! In fact, they are dictatorial and think party first and people later!

Now, after reading Mr. Seecharran’s insipid letter that carried a misleading caption, because the body of the letter failed to support the caption, I have to conclude that editors can be very liberal if and when they want to with any letter writer who has a view.

And to Mr. Seecharran, newspaper editors in Guyana don’t need to be schooled about when to attach ‘editor’s notes’ at the end of letters.

What these editors need to do is be more balanced in allowing letters critical and complimentary of government to be published. On this point, Kaieteur News and SN stand alone.
Emile Mervin