Dear Editor,
I do hope that the publisher of the Mirror newspaper will take heed of Mrs Janet Jagan’s call in her article published in the paper’s weekend edition, September 13-14, 2008, ‘For A Balanced and Honest Media!’ and that he or she will not use the excuse that the Mirror is a party organ and is therefore not subject to the same standards that are demanded of the other media houses, and is not obliged to publish my response to Mrs Jagan’s article of the referred date.
Mrs Jagan is known as a person who uses her pen with carefully crafted political designs. It is therefore not surprising to me whenever she inserts herself in debates on national issues. She often does so with the clear intention of imposing the PPP’s position as gospel. It is years now since my first public reference to the existence of the African Armed Resistance, and recently I had written a number of letters in which I had referred to this reality. And, being aware that Mrs Jagan spends a lot of her time carefully scrutinizing in the interest of her party and government what is published and said by other media houses, I was surprised that she had not sought to challenge my position before. However, she has chosen rather late in the day to take me on and I feel duty bound to respond to her diatribe.
In her article Mrs Jagan expressed the view that the state-owned media is the property of the government, rather than the people of Guyana. In doing so she clearly sought to justify the way that the state media was disseminating information in the course of which opinions, not supportive of the government and her party, are muted. But the ‘veteran politician’ did not stop there; she went on to chastise the Stabroek News for daring to publish my letter in its September 5 edition under the caption, ‘Rawlins group was engaged in a political struggle.’ I wish to make it very clear that as a political activist, I welcome polemics. In a certain sense it is an honour to have the attention of such a formidable force in our political landscape. There is a saying in politics that a measure of how successful your political work is, can be found in the viciousness of the other side’s response.
To all appearances Mrs Jagan’s vitriolic response to my letter has to do with the effectiveness of the arguments it contained. If this was not so why did she bother to reply? In responding she also advocated extreme treatment for me? So be it.
Mrs Jagan’s main position as highlighted in her article was, “Such preposterous assertions that are harmful to national unity, to fighting crime, to defining who is a criminal and who is not, and putting halos on the heads of men who shoot down children and women in cold blood are not only repulsive, irresponsible but could be treasonous.” There are two observations in the above which I can’t ignore − the first and last points. The question that comes to mind: Is she saying to the African community that the biggest obstacle to “national unity” is talk of the armed resistance and its political struggle? If this is the intention it is very instructive in the present political situation.
Her invoking of treason in relation to my letter is also instructive bearing in mind the government’s blatant abuse of our treason laws.
I am not surprised by Mrs Jagan’s endorsement of the PPP/C government’s crime-fighting methods where suspects are executed and not placed before a court of law. Our rulers expect us to accept the government and police attributing every crime to ‘Fineman’ and his group without the benefit of judicial scrutiny.
On the question of whether Rawlins and his comrades were engaged in a political struggle, Mrs Janet Jagan is advised to consult with President Bharrat Jagdeo. He has put on public record his view on this matter a long time ago. If by chance she is unable to discuss this with the President because they may not be on speaking terms, let me refer her to Minister of Home Affairs Clement Rohee’s speech in Parliament during the budget debate, when he made the observation that there are two types of criminals the security forces have to deal with, one of which he described as, “the psychotic criminals with political agendas.”
Finally, the PPP’s pretence when in opposition that it was committed to upholding political rights, has long been exposed by their actions since they are in government. Mrs Jagan ought to know by now that I cannot and will not be forced or intimidated into stopping this debate that is taking place on this important issue.
Yours faithfully,
Tacuma Ogunseye
