My record on human upliftment can withstand historical scrutiny

Mar 21, 2013 Letters

---

 

Dear Editor,
Reference is made to Freddie Kissoon’s column “Elected dictatorship takes over the airwaves” Kaieteur News, March 20, 2013.
Let me from the outset state that Freddie’s concerns about the government’s egregious conduct are correct and need to be addressed in order to restore good-governance which can only come about when there is a halt to the plundering of the nation’s resources, giving away our finite broadcasting spectrum to cohorts and cronies, violation of the laws and transgressing the citizens’ rights. Collectively the people can right these wrongs by holding government – executive and opposition – accountable.
The conversation between Freddie and I at Nigel’s Supermarket had to do with the Guyana Trades Union Congress (TUC)’s engagement with Sam Hinds in his capacity as Leader of the Government business in the National Assembly, regarding “the right and the duty to work” for Guyanese, as outlined in Article 22 of the Guyana Constitution. This matter attended to the non-employment of Guyanese labour in the construction of Marriott Hotel.
This meeting was covered in its entirety by the national media, a first for engagement with the PPP administration, and was also carried as news items. And two reasons informed this decision:-1) the nation will witness exactly what transpired, and 2) to avoid any misrepresentation of what transpired.
The TUC has nothing to hide. And this organization is not a member of the International Labour Organization (ILO) that supports talks as a mean to resolution and self-determination (Tripartite relations – government, labour and business), also guaranteed in Article 13, 38, 147 and 149C of the Guyana Constitution, to discard it. Our credibility and relevance are informed by these instruments and institutions which give meaning to our existence. Further, the TUC, given past experiences, is not fooled nor harbours any illusion that a government with a track record of acting in bad faith can change overnight. But the TUC also knows, given its historical record, that when it sits at the table, buttressed with its age-old record of stick-to-it-iveness, it can deliver for the society.
Having said this, the attempt by Kissoon (deliberate or accidental) to make the TUC out as naïve or weak, is deserving of attention. But in order to go forward it requires bringing to the fore a few matters.
Freddie will recall he and I travelled the road of disagreement before. In 2002 when I had cause to accuse the government of economic genocide, Kissoon, used his column in Stabroek News and attacked my position, accusing me of sensationalizing the issue. He ignored the United Nations’ definition of genocide and the evidence I presented to make my case.
Fast forward to today; Kissoon is in court correctly defending a libel suit brought by Bharrat Jagdeo who is offended by Kissoon calling him an ‘ideological racist.’ The case continues to rivet the society, but it will not be vain of me to say that some of the very evidence I relied on to support my claim of economic genocide against the African community, which Kissoon was once dismissive of, was also incorporated in his writings.  And again in the said year when I had cause to attack the PPP’s poor-governance and made the case that “the government has a responsibility to society” and is therefore obliged to be even-handed in its management, Kissoon used his column to attack my position.
It is good that my colleague, though no longer a friend of the government, has come around to understand, appreciate and champion the very things he was earlier against.
On his position against talking with the government and my rejoinder that “Freddie even your enemies you have to engage and talk to,” I further said “even when they are throwing bombs in Afghanistan, they are talking.”
My position is informed by human relations throughout history, from slavery, to Hubert Nathaniel Critchlow’s stance with the commercial class and colonial government, indentureship, colonization, civil rights, and present day events. History has shown that while the oppressed fight the oppressors for their rights, talks have always played a pivotal role to resolve issues and lay differences to rest.
Freddie has a different position and it would be helpful if he can cite for this nation any political event in history, other than armed removal of governments/political authority, where the oppressed have not talked and engaged the oppressors.  Further, to his claim that “Engagement with your adversary is a strategic concept – more strategic and conceptual,” he needs to shed some light on what he means and how the TUC can achieve it outside of the mentioned framework.
My colleague and friend would also recall when he was once in good stead with the PPP administration he played a major role in torpedoing, dismantling and demonizing the street struggle of Desmond Hoyte to bring an end to executive lawlessness, by misrepresenting Hoyte’s application of the Creole saying “mo fyah slo fyah.”
As part of the choir, Freddie spun a story that this saying meant Hoyte was calling for fires in Georgetown and attacks on persons. Today the beast (executive lawlessness) has run amok, devouring once friends like Kissoon, and he seeks street struggle as a major component to restore good-governance and secure the people’s rights. I join in this call as an ardent believer that struggles are never won by sheathing one’s most potent weapon(s).
My record on human upliftment (rights and the rule of law) can withstand historical scrutiny. It is a record of consistency and stick-to-it-iveness throughout the years, irrespective of the political party that forms the government. In this arena, Kissoon and I have travelled historically different paths. My position is informed by a principle that bonafide Labour does not have permanent enemy or permanent friend; Labour has permanent interest. This interest is guided by universal declarations, conventions, charters and laws; and the Guyana Constitution, and it is one I have acted in accordance with and communicated far and wide. And from time to time, this interest will clash with and form companionship with Freddie’s interest.
On the issue of the TUC’s president, Norris Witter’s statements, at a meeting with other national stakeholders hosted by Donald Ramotar, I am confident Bro. Witter is capable of representing the claim and will do so at a venue of his choosing. And on the letter by Elton McRae, another colleague and friend, which Freddie sees as “trenchantly critical” of the matter under discussion, a response is forthcoming.
Lincoln Lewis

---

---