Latest update April 7th, 2026 12:30 AM
Should Lennox Cornette’s cornice be taken away?
Apr 20, 2016 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon
Cynicism is gushing out of my head when I read that 17 years ago Mr. Lennox Cornette forged the signature of his boss at GT&T and therefore had to leave. From the views of some in the media, the argument is that he should not be the CEO of NCN because of that indiscretion 17 years ago for which he wasn’t charged.
Since criminality is not involved, then Cornette’s case brings moral judgement into focus. I don’t know Lennox Cornette at all. He was a student of mine about twenty years ago at UG, and since then I have not spoken to him or do I think I ever saw him. With this controversy, I know that he was employed at a few prominent places
I was surprised that Enrico Woolford lost out. My initial reaction was which candidate could beat out Woolford, but I am not familiar with Cornette’s curriculum vitae. My personal attitude is that I would not deny a qualified professional a management position in 2016, if 17 years ago he forged his boss’ signature where he worked. I have to see a very scholarly and erudite polemic to convince me to accept the death of that person’s professional career. And even so, I doubt I would accept it for two reasons. First, even with a criminal record, many countries have a limitation period where the record is removed from the system for very innocuous crimes. It means then that, officially, you have no criminal record
As a spin-off from this, why should one’s career be at an end after serving time for a crime that does not involve pedophilia, rape, homicidal robbery etc? If an accountant served his time for wounding during a drunken brawl, can’t he be redeemed and continue to contribute to his profession?
This country has produced a curious citizen with a unique record. He held four different statuses in the realm of law. First, he was a defendant, charged with stealing a bicycle tyre when he worked at Booker’s Stores in 1955. He was defended by one of the top lawyers of the day, B.O. Adams. This young man went on to become a lawyer, establishing a formidable reputation as a brilliant defence attorney. He was also a prosecutor and a judge. That is a unique record. He is still alive, extremely wealthy and in demand. Did his court matter in 1955 hold him back?
In the case of Cornette, he wasn’t even charged.
The second reason why I would reject an intellectual defence for taking away Mr. Cornette’s cornice is because Guyana does not have a code of moral correctness (there is such a guideline as adumbrated by that genius of a philosopher, Immanuel Kant), never had one and doesn’t look like it will have one in the future. The question then becomes compelling; who has the moral (not legal) authority to take away Cornette’s cornice? Additionally in the context of Guyana’s depraved record of immoral conduct from the sixties onwards, why isolate Cornette to use as an example of moral reclamation?
I will now become provocative. If I agree with those who want Cornette’s NCN crown to be withdrawn, then they must withdraw other crowns. This is where I find this society’s hypocrisy to be obnoxious, repugnant and sick. The new government could easily argue that all that went on before May 2015 was not the immoral world they shaped and that they want to start a new culture. And they can do so by using the Cornette forgery issue as the new standard. Sounds good! But what if there are others whose acts are more egregious than Cornette’s? I know a CEO in the public sector who was appointed a few months ago, who was fired by President Desmond Hoyte for dishonesty in public office.
I could give more examples. I worked at UG for 26 years. I know who is who at that place, and no moral righteousness exists there. I know of many more acts of indiscretion by people who are now in the public sector, appointed after 2015, including a deportee expelled from the USA on a serious conviction. Just a footnote; I read a letter-writer reminding us that Royston King was charged for a criminal offence. He is the Town Clerk.
The Americans have a nice way of reacting to an absurd situation. They would say, “Are you kidding me? I like that expression but I prefer my Caribbean lingo – “Maan yuh gat to be joking.” Mr. Cornette should not be the CEO at NCN, all because he forged a paper 17 years ago? “Maan yuh gat to be joking.”
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.