Mouth open, story jump out!

Aug 30, 2023 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Kaieteur News – The crime wave which followed the Feb 2001 prison jailbreak marked a traumatic period in the history of this country. Scores of innocent people were killed including children and members of the Guyana Police Force.

It was a frightening episode in our country. A young child was killed when gunmen riddled her home with bullets. A crippled widower was brutalized. Acid was thrown in the face of a young lady travelling in minibus through the Buxton gauntlet.  The gunmen took a liking to killing policemen. This was followed by mysterious ‘phantom killings’ of persons believed to be criminals or supporting the criminals.

Former President, and now Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo’s recent admission that this crime wave was part of an insurgency with political cover, raises  questions about his government’s handling of the events of that period. While his assertion is by no means controversial – the crime wave exhibited patterns of a political insurgency – Jagdeo’s   reluctance to undertake a detailed inquiry into that tumultuous period undermines the pursuit of justice, the stability of the State and the healing of affected families.

It is believed that the terror and fear created by the crime wave was exploited by political elements with an agenda to topple the government. It did not succeed because the gunmen that laid siege to Buxton were not only hardened criminals but they were dunderheads and ill-suited for political insurrection. They wanted to rob, murder and rape. And all of them met their just deserts.

But Jagdeo’s admission nonetheless highlights the blurred lines between criminal activities and political interests, revealing how political elements desperate for power could resort to stoking instability, fear and terror to advance their political ambitions. However, Jagdeo’s admission cannot be left as it is, it should lead to a renewal of calls for justice for those slaughtered by the criminals during that period.

A glaring inconsistency emerges from Jagdeo’s position: while he recognizes the crime wave as an insurgency with political cover, he has failed to initiate an inquiry into the matter. The killing of one of his Ministers, Saytadeow Sawh, highlights this inconsistency.

The Sawh’s family has persistently called for justice for the members of their family killed. Others too have made similar calls. Ignoring these demands perpetuates a culture of impunity that undermines trust in the government and trust in the State’s security apparatus.

Jagdeo’s assertion that certain aspects of the period will likely never be disclosed raises concerns about selective State secrecy. The suggestion that information might be buried with individuals like Roger Luncheon, long-standing Head of the Presidential Secretariat, casts a shadow over this period. This veiled approach is indicative of the style of secrecy that has become so characteristic of the PPPC government.

Jagdeo’s acknowledgment of political cover during the insurgency raises broader questions about the state of governance in Guyana. The intertwining of criminal activities and political interests speaks to the weakening of state institutions. By not pursuing a comprehensive inquiry, Jagdeo risks perpetuating an environment where those engaged in atrocities might believe that they are not answerable for their actions.

A nation grappling with a traumatic history needs to know the truth.  Jagdeo’s reluctance to fully disclose the events and circumstances surrounding the post-2001 crime wave hinders the process of learning the truth.

Guyanese must now demand the establishment of a commission of inquiry into the post-2001 crime wave. This entails uncovering the full extent of political involvement, identifying those responsible for criminal activities, and ensuring that justice is served. It will also mean that the secrets which Jagdeo believes will go to the grave with Roger Luncheon, must be exhumed and he, Jagdeo, must be called as a principal witness to state what he knows, including the extent to which the security services misled his government.

Jagdeo’s disclosure about the involvement of certain unnamed individuals within the police and army attempting to deceive the government during the post-2001 crime wave is troubling. In light of this revelation, justice demands a thorough inquiry into the actions of these individuals, as their conduct not threatened the security of the nation.

The alleged attempted deception by personnel within the police and army raises profound questions about the loyalty and integrity of those responsible for upholding law and order. An inquiry is essential to uncover the motives behind these actions, and whether they were driven by affiliations, or other ulterior motives. The public deserves to know if the deception was a result of systemic failures or political loyalties and whether these unnamed individuals were in cahoots with the criminals.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of this newspaper and its affiliates.)

---

• Bharrat Jagdeo, bullets, Peeping Tom, traumatic, Vice President

---