The Media is where citizens air their grievances and concerns in search of solidarity

Jun 11, 2018 Letters

Dear Editor,
I would like to refer to a letter by a GECOM Commissioner, entitled, “A resort to ethnic politics” in KN June 7th. The commissioner asserted that at the “determination” (termination) of Gocool Boodoo’s contract the PPP had accused the PNCR commissioners for plotting to dismiss Indian staff at GECOM. The Commissioner wrote that he/she, on that occasion, was “forced to break my silence. I made it known publicly that it was Gocool Boodoo who initiated and insisted on the dismissal of two Indo-Guyanese senior staffers of GECOM.
The Commissioner continued, “On that occasion, the PPP`s resort to ethnic politics, to have Boodoo retained by GECOM, did not work. Boodoo`s contract was not renewed; GECOM no longer had to contend with a CEO who on two occasions, 2006 and 2011, personally presented and vowed for the wrong results of those elections.”
Something seems amiss here! The services of Boodhoo was about to be terminated, the PPP was crying victimization. This commissioner was” forced” to break his/her silence and let the public know that “it was Gocool Boodoo who initiated and insisted on the dismissal of two Indo-Guyanese senior staffers of GECOM”.
Was this necessary? Who were these staffers and what was the relevance to Boodoo’s contract termination? Did initiation of the dismissal of two Indian staffers make Goocol a racist?
The Commissioner then expressed a sense of relief or joy at Boodoo’s contract termination by saying, “GECOM no longer had to contend with a CEO who on two occasions, 2006 and 2011, personally presented and vowed for the wrong results of those elections.”
The Commissioner without any evidence, is dogmatically asserting that some other party won the 2006 and 2011 elections. Profane!
The commissioner said, “There is no such thing as party commissioners”. We all know that both PPP and PNC were allowed to appoint three persons to represent their interest on the Commission at GECOM. Why shouldn’t these people be called party commissioners?
The seventh position – GECOM chairman, was supposed to derive its neutrality, by being selected from a list supplied by the opposition leader. That did not happen for the appointment of the present GECOM Commissioner. That should have been a matter of concern for this Commissioner, had he/she not being prejudiced.
The Commissioner wrote, “However, it would be remiss of me if I did not disclose that the granting of high and low scores including perfect scores is a precedent created by a PPP”. Is this statement an attempt to condone what is alleged (discrimination against Indians) by Luncheon at GECOM? Was this person ever a commissioner at GECOM? “Going to the media” (the commissioner’s words) is not a crime. The Media is where people go to seek redress and to garner solidarity for causes. Why did this person not complain to the Media when it was perceived that the PPP were discriminating against Afro Guyanese- the media is where people air their grievances- surely this writer would know that, having sent “a resort to ethnic politics “ (letter) to KN.
In like manner the public looks to the Media for the evidence on Luncheon’s allegation.
Rudolph Singh

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News