Campaign against Jagdeo’s Nobel Prize nomination begins

Dec 10, 2009 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

---

This writer has seen evidence that David Dabydeen has indeed nominated President Jagdeo for the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize. This will certainly cause a colossal rift between Dabydeen and one of Guyana’s most admired citizens ever.
Dr. Dabydeen told this fine Guyanese personality that he did not submit Jagdeo’s curriculum vitae. Now the Guyana/Caribbean Institute for Democracy (GCID) has launched a campaign to write the Nobel Committee to reject’s Jagdeo’s name. The GCID has been e-mailing hundreds of Guyanese in and out of Guyana with details as to how they should go about making contact with the Norwegian officials and the protocol that should be used when communicating with the Nobel Committee
It is amazing, absolutely amazing, that this justified campaign had to be initiated by an organisation outside of Guyana, rather than the Guyanese opposition parties. Now that we know that Dabydeen did submit papers to Norway, the opposition will have no other option but to provide the Nobel Committee with details of Jagdeo’s dictatorial regime.
The immediate reaction to Dabydeen’s nomination was one of humour. Very few persons in or out of Guyana believed that it was serious and they dismissed it because Mr. Jagdeo lacks the accomplishments that earn a person the Nobel Peace Prize.
On the contrary, not only does Mr. Jagdeo lack those achievements but he has a record that is unimpressive. It is this inelegant balance-sheet that should be presented to the Nobel Committee.
The rejection of Mr. Jagdeo’s name should not be a ponderous task for the Nobel Committee. The information of the dictatorial governorship of Mr. Jagdeo is vast and disturbing. Mr. Jagdeo himself will not do his cause any good when he returns from Copenhagen next week (assuming that he isn’t going on his customary extensive foreign trips).
We can expect more denunciations from him of his critics, more vitriolic outpourings, more inflexibilities and the brazen and contemptuous dismissal of any and everything that is democratic. As early as the beginning of 2010, the opposition and other stakeholders, including the TUC and the GHRA, should start to plan their presentation.
Two questions arise. What is the format and who should do the presentation. Let us answer the last question first.  Many names come immediately to mind, especially Guyanese that have a semantic reach that will be useful. But the delegation to Norway to expose Jagdeo must be led by parliamentarians.
The Nobel Committee will listen to parliamentarians. When their credentials are read out to the Nobel Committee, they will lend weight to the cause. A person like Lincoln Lewis should be in the delegation because he holds an international position that the Nobel Committee will think about. Lewis is the General-Secretary of the Caribbean Congress of Labour.
There is nothing, absolutely nothing wrong with having some fine Guyanese mind travel to Norway to denounce the ten-year-old dictatorship of Jagdeo. But in the end it is the status of the presenters that will count. The Nobel Committee comes across as one of those internationally prestigious organisations that are highly bureaucratized and put emphasis on the status of the petitioner.
Therefore, if the petition to remove Jagdeo’s name is presented by a group of Guyanese parliamentarians, it will definitely be a tremendous advantage than if the pursuit is done by a group of academics and journalists.
What should be the format? The Nobel Committee should be presented with a detailed volume titled “Guyana: The Democratic Violations, Racism and Social Pathologies of the Bharrat Jagdeo Presidency.” The memorandum should document the consistent violations of the rule of law and democratic structures under Mr. Jagdeo.
The corruption index must be included. Social pathologies should be easy to put together. Here is a President that has as his information liaison, an official accused of one of the most heinous crimes outside of murder and rape.
And this President is happy to retain him even though the US Embassy has cancelled his visa. There must be mention of the visa problems of Minister Rohee and Commissioner Greene and the President’s refusal to part with their service. Most definitely, all the evidence in the Simels case must be outlined.
Finally, on the Dabydeen denial, are there scholars outside there (and in Guyana) that see the exigency to contact the higher officials of Warwick University to ask for an investigation as to what Dabydeen did?
Dr. Dabydeen denied the nomination to an outstanding Guyanese for whom the governors of Warwick University have profound respect. Who would they believe? Which one will the Guyanese people believe? Finally, what is the Guyanese opposition’s position on Dabydeen’s artificial denial?

---

---