The PPP pretence of being committed to upholding political rights has long been exposed

Sep 18, 2008 Letters

DEAR EDITOR,
I do hope that the publisher of the Mirror newspaper will take heed of Mrs. Janet Jagan call in her article published in the paper’s weekend edition, 13-14 September, 2008 – “For A Balanced and Honest Media!” – and that he or she will not use the excuse that the Mirror is a party organ and is therefore not subject to the same standards that are demanded of the other media houses and is not obliged to publish my response to Mrs. Jagan’s article of the referred date.

Mrs. Jagan is known as a person who uses her pen with carefully crafted political designs. It is therefore not surprising to me whenever she inserts herself in debates on national issues she often does so with the clear intention of imposing the PPP’s position as gospel.

It is years now since my first public reference to the existence of the African Armed Resistance, and recently I had written a number of letters in which I had referred to this reality.

And, being aware that Mrs. Jagan spends a lot of her time carefully scrutinizing in the interest of her party and government what is published and said by other media houses, I was surprised that she had not sought to challenge my position before. However, she has chosen rather late in the day to take me on and I feel duty bound to respond to her diatribe.

In her article Mrs. Jagan expressed the view that the state owned media is the property of the Government, rather than the people of Guyana.

In doing so she clearly sought to justify the way that the state media was disseminating information in the course of which opinions, not supportive of the Government and her party, are muted.

But the “veteran politician” did not stop there. She went on to chastise the SN for daring to publish my letter in its September 5th edition under the caption, “Rawlins’ group was engaged in a political struggle”. I wish to make it very clear that as a political activist, I welcome polemics.

In a certain sense it is an honour to have the attention of such a formable force in our political landscape.
There is a saying in politics that a measure of how successful your political work is can be found in the viciousness of the other side’s response.

To all appearances, Mrs. Jagan’s vitriolic response to my letter has to do with the effectiveness of the arguments it contained. If this was not so why did she bother to reply? In responding she also advocated extreme treatment for me. So be it.

Mrs. Jagan’s main position as highlighted in her article was, “Such preposterous assertions that are harmful to national unity, to fighting crime, to defining who is a criminal and who is not, and puffing halos on the heads of men who shoot down children and women in cold blood are not only repulsive, irresponsible but could be treasonous.” There are two observations in the above which I can’t ignore; the first and last points.

The question that comes to mind: Is she saying to the African Community and nation that the biggest obstacle to “national unity” is talk of the armed resistance and its political struggle?

If this is the intention it is very instructive in the present political situation. Her invoking of treason in relation to my letter is also instructive, bearing in mind her party and Government’s blatant abuse and use of our treason laws.

I am not surprised by Mrs. Jagan endorsement of the PPP/C Government’s crime fighting methods and its policy of executing suspect and not placing them before a court of law.

Our rulers expect us to accept the Government and police attributing every crime to ‘Fine Man’ and his group without the benefit of judicial scrutiny.

On the question of whether Rawlins and his comrades were engaged in a political struggle, Mrs. Janet Jagan is advised to consult with President Bharrat Jagdeo. He has put on public record his view on this matter a long time ago.

If by chance she is unable to discuss this with the President because they may not be on speaking terms, let me refer her to the Honourable Minister of Home Affairs, Clement Rohee’s speech in the National Parliament during the budget debate when he made the observation that there are two types of criminals the security forces have to deal with, one of which he described as, “the psychotic criminals with political agendas.”

Finally, the PPP pretence when in opposition that it is committed to upholding political rights has long been exposed by their actions since they are in the government.

They now feel free to charge political activists with treason and sedition primarily because these activists dare to address issues that are in the public domain.

Mrs. Jagan you ought to know by now that I cannot and will not be forced or intimidated into stopping this debate that is taking place on this important issue.
Tacuma Ogunseye