Convenient invisibility of the usual suspects is sickening

Apr 05, 2022 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

---

Kaieteur News – I meet people all the time who complain to me about the ugly minds of people who speak selectively on issues in Guyana while basking in their reticence on disturbing nastiness that occur with increasing frequency.
The de facto opposition leader and the head of the PNC, has demanded the removal of GECOM’s chair, Justice Claudette Singh. Let’s rewind the tape to April, 2020. Three prominent female personalities holding important portfolios in society were interviewed by the Guyana Chronicle for their views in the role of Ms. Singh during the election fiasco (please see my column of Saturday, October 17, 2020.)
One woman said she was proud of Singh taking the right decisions in CARICOM and the criticisms against her were misogynistic. The second woman told the paper that Singh was a brilliant woman with class and integrity. The third lady wax lyrical on Singh’s competence.
Fast forward the tape to April 2022. The PNC leader is requesting the removal of Ms. Singh. But he did not echo the sentiment in isolation. He gave his reason – she votes with the three PPP commissioners thus she is not impartial (his word). There is a realpolitik dimension to this stance by the opposition leader.
Those are the things and actions the world expects from people out of power and who need fiery rhetoric that can expand their support base. It is logical and understandable though unacceptable to countless others.
What you do not expect is for citizens who belong to associations and organisations proclaiming their patriotism, support for good governance and their neutral role in politics shutting their mouths when dangerous factors raise their sadistic heads.
The contention of the opposition leader is highly absurd and is the stuff that should meet with instance dismissal because the accompanying research that his supporters need to see is missing. The usual suspects (TUS) when they write their letters in the newspapers, send off their press releases, and offer their critiques on Zoom panel discussions are quick to warn us not to target the messenger.
But this is exactly what the PNC leader has done and the invisibility of TUS is visibly sickening. The contention should not be the lady but the topics she votes on. The PNC leader must prove his case by a research conclusion on the subjects she has voted on with the PPP commissioners.
First, what are the issues the PPP commissioners tabled that found voting support for Ms. Singh? Are these matters inimical to the conduct of a free poll? If they are, then yes, the chairperson is biased. But why would the PPP representatives compose papers to be accepted by GECOM that destroy the basis for holding a free and fair poll. Why would a strong favourite to win future elections go that route? It does not make sense thus, the call for the removal of the GECOM chair is unacceptable.
The chairperson did not have a voting pattern that favoured the PPP commissioners after the election was concluded on Monday, March 2. If she did, then the president, who was sworn in on August 2, should have been president since March 3. What the GECOM chairperson did, whether by mistake or otherwise, was to allow a party that lost an election to stay in power five months after it was defeated.
Against this background, the PNC leader is out of place to want the chairperson to be removed because of bias. But there is a bigger question at stake here, and here is where the ugly minds of TUS should be condemned. With the incessant calls for power sharing, there has to be moral and political responsibility of opposition politicians if they are to be trusted with a power-sharing formula.
The seminal question is what makes humans in this country think that there isn’t going to be a repetition of the dismissal demand if the new chairperson doesn’t vote the way the PNC wants him/her to.
The PNC leader, in rejecting the continuation of Ms. Singh also took aim at the new Chief Election Officer (CEO), Vishnu Persaud, who he claims is biased too. But one would have thought that such a statement would have achieved some modicum of credibility if in the same breath he had uttered a few words about the conduct of Persaud’s predecessor, Keith Lowenfield.
Is the PNC leader telling the voters who turned up on March 2, 2020 that Mr. Lowenfield was a less biased CEO? So will TUS send a letter to the newspapers with 45 signatures supporting Ms. Singh? What do you think?
(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

---

---