Dear Editor,
I stumbled across a most amusing but dangerous article captioned ‘Larlene’s too young’ by the ‘Parrot’ in the Kaieteur News dated November 21, 2008. It is clear that the writer is part of the government’s propaganda campaign designed to convince Guyanese that torture should be accepted as a reasonable interrogation technique. In keeping with the government’s line of attack, the writer reasoned that because of the heinous crimes being committed against innocent Guyanese certain mechanisms should be in place for garnering information from suspects, apparently even if it means torture.
This same sort of sentiment was expressed by the President and his ministers who tell Guyanese that torture complaints must be seen in some kind of context. And dare I ask what context? Breaching citizens’ human rights needs no clarification, explanation, justification or context. The problem is that the government lacks a simple coherent and comprehensive crime-fighting strategy, so they rely on whatever haphazard method is available to them. Common sense will dictate that strategies and tactics may change to meet unprecedented challenges in the security sector, but torture should never be part of any new strategy, since one cannot attempt to solve a crime by committing another crime.
It is also clear that the government has been selective in which crime they think needs attention, or will give them the most political mileage, as opposed to a clear resolve to tackle every criminal act that causes pain and suffering to innocent people. For instance, there seems to be a reluctance to investigate those crimes that they deem to be drug related. And then there are those where the victims were critical of the government or expressed a different political view. The slaying of Ronald Waddell is a classic case in point. I wonder what the status of the investigation is in that case.
‘Parrot’ also lamented that the PNC continued to blame the government for the escalating crime situation. I wonder whom they must blame; after all the PPP/C is in the driving seat. This is no different from the Democrats and the citizens of the US blaming the Bush administration for the struggling US economy and the current credit crisis. The PPP/C, the government of the day, has the responsibility to provide for the internal security of the nation. They boast that more than 50% of Guyanese at the last election gave them the mandate to govern; the question now is whether this is the kind of governance they had bargained for.
Maybe the propagandist can advise us. ‘Parrot’ says that the PNC should ask the survivors of the Lusignan and Bartica massacres how they feel. What an insult to those people whose tragedy is being used as a political weapon. Well, in the first instance there should have been no Lusignan or Bartica massacres, but they happened because there was no crime-fighting strategy. The government had an opportunity to learn from the Agricola massacre in 2006 where eight people were slain after gunmen locked down an entire community and unleashed their venom on the unsuspecting victims. However, there were claims that these killings were part of some of some revenge plot, or drug/gang warfare, so again, there was no haste to hunt down the killers. And one year later there were back-to-back massacres.
Maybe the government should advise us as to whether the promises made to the Lusignan residents by the President after the massacre have been met. Do the residents feel much safer today? Did they get street lights, etc? We need to know these things rather than try to use people’s suffering and loss for political mileage.
In another outlandish attempt to justify torture, the writer alleges that the PNC used force in office, and under Burnham the party unleashed atrocities on Guyanese, so it is no big deal if the PPP/C government is doing same. Now, assuming that the Cde’s claim is accurate, does it give the PPP/C the right to equal or surpass the Burnham regime in this regard? Certainly not. Further, it is no secret that the Burnham government was branded by the PPP/C locally and internationally as a dictatorial regime, so if the Burnham government operated in the undemocratic and brutal manner that ‘Parrott’ suggested, maybe it was in keeping with these dictatorial beliefs and practices. These, of course cannot be excused, but can be understood. However, this current administration since 1992 has been touting itself as a democratic government, and with regard to torture, it has signed on to the various international conventions which outlawed torture. But what Guyanese are getting are action and statements from the government which undermine democratic principles and values and which are contrary to the claims of the government. In fact how can one compare the actions of a supposedly democratic regime with one that is deemed dictatorial?
Further, there seems to be a race by the government to outdo any wrong the PNC government might have done. As Dr Rupert Roopnaraine put it while talking to the Guyanese diaspora a few months ago, the PPP/C made the PNC government look like boy scouts when it came to corruption, victimization and the crime situation. This was man who was in the leadership of a political organization, the WPA, that challenged the Burnham government on many fronts, and protested with his party against the PNC government.
Leader of the Vision for Guyana, Mr Peter Ramsaroop, also told that same grouping a few weeks ago, that once you criticize the government you are targeted to be victimized. He used CN Sharma as an example and hinted that CN had to tone down his rhetoric to stay in business. So is this democracy, where the government targets its critics?
‘Parrot’ claimed that ‘Larlene’ is too young to understand how torture might be a good interrogation technique, and to know of the ills of the PNC government. From this comment it is obvious that many who are old enough cannot analyze any issue critical to the nation’s interest without seeing it through the lenses of the PNC or the PPP.
This kind of thinking, I believe, will only stifle any really progressive thinking. Guyanese today are not concerned with harping on the ills of the past; they are more concerned with how their future can be improved. It is important that we know and understand our past in order that we can better our future. And yes, safeguarding human rights is a big part of the concern that we all must share in this current age. Whether torture was condoned 30 years ago or not, it certainly cannot be justified or condoned now, not with the spread of progressive thinking and democracy the world over.
If this is what we advocate we might as well encourage citizens to take the law into their own hands.
And while ‘Larlene’ might be deemed too young, remember age is not the same as experience, and knowledge is not about how many certificates one has and how much one knows, but rather how one is able to use that knowledge to better him/herself, improve one’s surroundings and contribute to the greater good of the entire society.
Yours faithfully,
Lurlene Nestor
