There are two pointed dilemmas posed to the Minister of Local Government, Mr Kellawan Lall and the government as a result of the infamous bar incident a month ago.
The first has to do with decency. No one holding high office – in this case, a cabinet position along with membership of the National Assembly – should engage in the behaviour that Mr Lall is accused of engaging in and still hold such office. Common decency and certainly the standards of behaviour that public officers are held to in functioning liberal democracies dictate one of two things: that Mr Lall mount a vigorous defence of his conduct particularly if the account presented by his accuser was fallacious and maliciously concocted or that he resign. Mr Lall has done neither. He has not attempted to defend his conduct nor has he attempted to salvage some respect by resigning.
The second dilemma and quite clearly the more serious and far-reaching is the preservation and supremacy of the rule of law. Whereas Mr Lall’s determination to cling to office just sullies his standing and makes him notorious, the abject lack of sanctions against him by his president, government and the police force strike at the very heart of the rule of law and its even-handed application.
How many people haven’t been charged and taken before the court on allegations less serious or just as serious as those that have been levelled against Mr Lall? Forget for a moment that this minister of government allegedly used indecent and threatening language at a barbecue. Focus on the alleged assault of a youth with a gun that eventually caused blood to gush from a wound, the chasing of the said youth with a vehicle and the piece de resistance – the wanton discharge of a firearm in a threatening and disorderly manner when there was no threat to the minister.
Legions of people can no doubt shamefacedly testify to being hauled before the courts to answer such charges. Yet, a minister of government is allowed to escape the rule of law.
His party, the PPP, no doubt deeply embarrassed by his performance has had to acknowledge that it has reprimanded him. This fell far short of the accountability that the PPP in its long past in the opposition has tried so valiantly to exact from others. It issued no release on this disgraceful incident but answered to the matter at a recent press conference. Its General Secretary, Mr Donald Ramotar, missed the opportunity to bat for law and order ironically at the same forum where he indicated for the first time that he was interested in running for the presidency. As to his barb that if it weren’t for the Stabroek News there might not have been so much of a public outcry, we can only say that Stabroek News is relieved that it is on the side of common decency and law and order.
While the PPP has at least made an effort at addressing this matter, President Jagdeo seems completely oblivious to the well-justified consternation that Mr Lall has thus far escaped censure. President Jagdeo must at least recognize that as Head of State he is the ultimate custodian of the basic values that bind the country together and the rule of law and act accordingly.
As it relates to the police force, the conduct thus far of the Commissioner of Police (Acting) Mr Henry Greene has done nothing to dispel the well-entrenched concern that the police force is not immune to political directives and control. How come a month later the police have nothing to say about the discharge of shots from the firearm? What would the force do if three of four citizens in a symbolic protest decided to discharge their firearms outside of a rum shop and later say they didn’t want to pursue the matter any further?
The rule of law disconnect in this affair has direct impact on the police force. None of the ambitious projects to reform the force will amount to much if the culture of double standards where the rule of law is concerned is allowed to flourish and that includes the well-titled IDB citizen security programme and the current efforts of the UK government.
Finally, sections of the public continue to be amazed at the feeble responses that emanate from the main opposition party when it should be doing what opposition parties are geared to do: hold the government accountable. While the AFC has presented a motion to Parliament office on Mr Lall’s conduct, the PNCR Leader and Leader of the Opposition, Mr Robert Corbin would only offer the rather vague and uninspiring line that the people of Guyana would have to censure Mr Lall. This is unlikely to happen in any effective way even if there was some mechanism for a plebiscite. And regardless of whether a motion in Parliament is doomed to failure it was incumbent upon Mr Corbin to declare where he stood on the motion or to mount some other initiative within the ambit of the law if he felt strongly on the matter. Mr Corbin’s own conduct as a minister in the PNC government many years ago came in for harsh attack from the PPP and it remains a burden of sorts. Perhaps he is not the person to be articulating the party’s position on this matter.
Clearly, decisions on the rum shop matter have to be made in several quarters. The public awaits.
