DEATH AND DISHONOUR

May 24, 2009 AFC Column, Features / Columnists

---

By Raphael Trotman
Leader, AFC
The abominable and disgraceful state of Le Repentir Cemetery has finally received the serious attention of the Georgetown City Council; but for how long? It is a matter of grave concern to every resident of Georgetown that the cemetery, in which the remains of their loved ones are interred, has now become an impregnable jungle.
That this has been allowed to happen is nothing short of tragic and disgraceful. With this in mind it is difficult to commend the belated efforts of the Georgetown City Council in their hastily convened meeting held on Tuesday last when it was decided that a plan for the restoration of the cemetery was being put into place.

The current Georgetown City Council has been around since 1994. Then, like many of those present, I became a Councilor of that “august” body that was greatly expected to lead the rebirth of local government democracy, and the modern management of city administration. Today it is fifteen years old and desperately in need of an overhaul and reorientation.
It would appear that despite the valiant efforts of the Mayor and Councillors that the spirit of the City Council has come to an end. It has become extinguished by a combination of time and circumstances, and nothing can be done to breathe new life into it, except to ensure that local government elections are held under a system of true and meaningful reforms. I really commend my erstwhile comrades who have remained, but believe that it is my entitlement to speak to them as I do now.

Nowhere else is this extinguishment of life and responsibility more evident than at the physical point which I will deliberately and maliciously call the “the confluence” where the Mandela Avenue dump site meets the jungle once known as Le Repentir Cemetery. Sometime ago, one of the daily newspapers showed a photo of a family burying their relative in the background of the dumpsite. In that photo is the display of the graphic and symbolic display of the obvious facts that two of the city’s two main functions of maintaining environmental cleanliness, and providing a place for dignified burials, had come to an end, and that the city fathers and mothers had themselves come to their last point. There is no further place to go for the cemetery, the Mandela Avenue dumpsite, and/or for the Mayor & Councillors of Georgetown.

In many respects, the expansion of these two municipal nightmares, into national disgraces, epitomizes the collapse of the City Government, and the total disregard of the PPP government for standards, for tradition, and for the respect for, and honour of the dead. There is a saying that “in the democracy of the dead all men at last are equal. There is neither rank nor station nor prerogative in the republic of the grave.” Absolutely, and obviously, even in death, there is no democracy here in Guyana, and especially, for those whose religion prescribes burial rather than cremation.

I am convinced that the PPP government has deliberately starved the City Council of much-needed funds and reforms, so as to bring about its inevitable collapse. This is what the Central Government has worked for and now it is happening. By not holding local government, by not agreeing to reforms to have the city raise its own taxes, or to share in the revenues from road licenses for example, by giving monies grudgingly, and by always ensuring that there was tension between City Hall and the Ministry of Local Government, the PPP/C government has ensured that Georgetown, the Capital City, stinks.
It is beyond disgraceful that the place where people are supposed to be interred for their “eternal rest” is now a literal jungle. Trees, some as high as 25 feet, are growing out of, around, and through tombs. Swarms of bees, caiman, anacondas and maybe even a few unknown species now make the place their natural habitat …thus challenging the Georgetown Zoo for the distinction as being the place to go to see the animals of Guyana.

This situation didn’t happen overnight. It has been in the making for years. The system was just allowed to collapse in the full view of all. There was total abdication and capitulation on the parts of both the City Council and Central Government. There is little wonder that the Barbadian investor took one look at Le Repentir, and asked when the next flight out was. It is my view that he was afraid not only at what appeared before him, but more because he realised that the people who allowed the cemetery to get to its present state are nothing short of barbarians, and it was these very barbarians he would have to do business with as he unfolded the layers of his investment. That prospect more than likely sickened him and chased him.
At this stage we need to move to addressing the problem immediately. No self-respecting government in the world should sit by and see its primary, and in a sense national cemetery, become over-run and destroyed in this manner. Some people have suggested that it is because those in authority are not very interested in burials that this is happening. The government’s silence and inaction only serve to reinforce this belief.

The following recommendations are being offered out of concern and with the hope that they will be factored into the menu of other recommendations being formulated:
1. The identification and preparation of a new cemetery on the outskirts of the city. This new cemetery should be privatized and managed like a business.
2. The granting by the Public Health authorities for permission to be given to citizens to conduct burials at private sites provided that all public health standards are met.
3. The cleaning up of the current site to be paid for by the stakeholders – Government of Guyana, City Hall, and the parlours that are benefiting financially.
4. Churches, associations such as THAG and citizens should be invited to assist in clearing and restoring Le Repentir.
5. The life of Le Repentir should be considered over within the next twelve months and its maintenance should be the responsibility of the City and the National Trust of Guyana with the involvement of the Tourism & Hospitality Association of Guyana.
Our relatives are being dishonoured in death.

________________________________________________________________________

THE AFC’S FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL OF 2006

DOCUMENTS EXEMPTED FROM DISCLOSURE
As part of the AFC’s continuing process of educating the citizens on the benefits of Freedom of Information legislation, and of the specific contents of the Bill that has been presented to the National Assembly, we present an overview of the documents that are exempted from being accessed by citizens.
Part 4 of the Bill addresses documents that are not exempted, for different reasons, from being made public. This is a normal feature of legislation of this type and citizens will agree that not every single document must be publicized because of the reasons stated below. However, if a request for a copy of a document is refused for one of the legal reasons, then those reasons are expected to be set out in a form. The person making the request may challenge the refusal.

Clause 24-34 of the draft Bill gives the various categories of documents that are exempted. These include:
a) Cabinet documents including, documents prepared by a Minister of Government, or for a Minister of Government to be used in Cabinet. This restriction shall last for no more than ten (10) years.
b) Documents that contain information, which could affect the defence and national security of Guyana, and those which could interfere with the lawful activities of the security and intelligence services.
c) Documents that should not, in the public interest, be publicized because publication would interfere with relations between Guyana and another State; Guyana and an international organisation such as CARICOM or the UN;
d) The internal working documents of government officers and Ministers of Government.
e) Documents which if publicized could affect the fairness of the administration of justice and the right of a citizen to a fair trial.

These, generally, are the documents that are exempted from being publicised. However, government officials cannot simply claim that they will not provide the information sought. The reason for the refusal must be given to the person seeking the information, and that refusal is challengeable in a court of law by the person seeking the information.

---

---