When ordinary citizens first became familiar with Mr Roger Khan’s name during the killing years of 2002 onwards, they would not have believed that a partial denouement to the events of that period would have played out not here, but in a US federal courtroom. Yet last week during the trial of Mr Robert Simels (Khan’s one-time lawyer) the nation was riveted by sworn testimony given first by a self-confessed former member of the phantom squad, and then from the co-director of the Smith Myers company in the UK.

The evidence given by prosecution witness, Mr Selwyn Vaughn, that Mr Khan had ordered the killing of Mr Ronald Waddell, had the effect of a bombshell on the Co-operative Republic, but it was testimony concerning the alleged link between both a government minister as well as the government and the convicted drug dealer which was more damaging to the authorities and sent them into vociferous denial mode. One of those links related to the now infamous electronic surveillance equipment which was seized by a GDF patrol from a pick-up in which Roger Khan and two others were sitting in December 2002.

The peregrinations of the spyware have achieved almost legendary status, no less than the speculation about who had the real thing – the authorities in the US or the Guyana Police Force. At least the New York trial provided some possible clarification of that particular mystery. It would appear that the equipment consisted of an intercept receiver and two laptops; the former and one of the latter appear to be in the possession of the US government, while the second laptop is presumably the one the local police claim to have.

Be that as it may, the problem for the government came when Mr Peter Myers of Smith Myers took the stand and said under oath that the cellular intercept equipment used by Mr Khan had been sold to the Government of Guyana. We had published emails to the same effect which had been submitted by Mr Simels’ defence team in support of affidavits long before this, as well as a disclosure from the period when Mr Simels still represented Khan. The latter’s defence team had claimed then that an FBI probe had found that the Guyana government had given Mr Khan permission to purchase the electronic surveillance equipment from the Spy Shop in Florida. The government here subsequently denied it.

On Friday, the government again denied the purchase of the equipment, following Mr Myers’ testimony. The problem this time is that we are not dealing with emails, but with sworn statements in open court given by the head of a known private company who one cannot think would have reason to perjure himself. Either, therefore, he is telling the truth, or his company was duped into selling the equipment to Mr Khan when they thought they were selling it to the Government of Guyana. If the latter, then not only should that be a source of concern to Smith Myers, but also to the administration here.

In June last year the Ministry of Home Affairs said that it had not authorized the importation of the surveillance equipment, and neither had it sought approval from the US authorities for an export licence. Shortly thereafter, Dr Roger Luncheon said that he had not signed any document authorizing the importation of the equipment, while for his part President Jagdeo added that it was only the US government which could authorize such a sale. The latest statement from the Government of Guyana said, “it was not a party to any transaction with the US Government agency responsible for granting export licensing for that [the spy] equipment.”

Well all of the above details may be red herrings, of course. There has been no accusation to date that either the Ministry of Home Affairs or Dr Luncheon played a role in importing the equipment at any level; the government official whose name has been cited in this connection is Dr Leslie Ramsammy.

Furthermore, given what Mr Myers said on the stand on Thursday, confirming that a UK company was involved, one should perhaps ask the question whether it was not the British authorities from whom approval had to be obtained, rather than the US ones, even though the Florida Spy Shop acted as an agent. The bureaucratic processes in these cases are by no means clear to the ordinary citizen, and exactly what kind of documentation had to be obtained and from whom is in need of some elucidation.

Which brings us to the allegations against Dr Leslie Ramsammy. We had already published the emails referred to above naming the Health Minister as the alleged government contact in the purchase of the spyware, and on Thursday, Mr Simels’ defence counsel repeated this to Capitol News. The most damming allegation, of course, came from Mr Vaughn, who said on the stand that after Mr Waddell was gunned down, Mr Khan placed a call to the Minister, and that at some point Dr Ramsammy had met Roger Khan at the latter’s business place. An angry Dr Ramsammy has denied all the allegations, telling the media among other things, that he met neither Khan nor Vaughn, and stating that he was arranging his father’s funeral at the time Ronald Waddell was killed. He asserted vehemently that he had been framed by the prosecution witness in the US.

There are, of course, four possibilities: either the government and Dr Ramsammy have both been framed; or neither has been framed; or Dr Ramsammy has been framed but not the government; or the government has been framed but not Dr Ramsammy. The Minister and the government have separately insisted on their innocence in this affair, so one must take the first possibility as the one they adhere to – although the government has not actually said it has been framed. If it had nothing to do with the purchase of the equipment, however, then fraud must have taken place at some level.

Fulminations and flat denials in and of themselves will not quash suggestions of complicity, let alone uncover how a serious fraud has been perpetrated; the only thing which will do that is a careful investigation which produces evidence to absolve the parties named and reveal how a minister and the government he served had been set up. And one would think that the administration would want to follow this up with some energy, since if its name can be used for the purchase of surveillance equipment, it could be used for the purchase of something more dangerous.

It must be said, however, that the government has been slothful in following up allegations previously made, which it would have been in a position to investigate. In the emails made public by this newspaper, for example, there was one indicating that a Mr Chapman had come here to train Mr Khan in the use of the spy equipment. As far as one can tell, however, no effort was made to track his arrival, etc, in this country; the Commissioner of Police who is also the Chief Immigration Officer had simply nothing to say.

And on Thursday, Mr Myers confirmed that Mr Chapman had been contracted by his company to come to Guyana to train persons in the use of the laptops, etc. So there is an opportunity again to investigate his entry into (and departure from) this country, how he was processed through the airport – was he given access to the VIP lounge, for example? – and anything else which might be relevant.

Capitol News has reported that the US government intends to call Fedex officials to testify, and it is conceivable that we might learn from these who took delivery of the equipment, among other things. The main paper trail, of course, will lie outside this country, although not necessarily primarily in the United States. Smith Myers is a British company, and its invoices; copies of receipts, containing perhaps, references to bank drafts/cheques as well as purchaser; copies of official authorizations; applications for licences of any kind; correspondence of one sort or another – including with whoever purported to represent the Guyana government, and with the company contracted to come here to conduct the training exercise – will be filed in the UK.

Smith Myers, of course, is a private company, and may not be amenable to making available all its records, although, as Capitol News suggested in a different context, it could be asked to produce the authorization provided to the Florida office which allowed the equipment to be sold to Guyana.  And then there is the company which sent Mr Chapman; it too must have correspondence on record. The US might have records of export licences, or some equivalent documentation, although anything in its jurisdiction will not be furnished during the period of an ongoing trial.

Considering the gravity of the accusations in this case, any investigation would have to be at the level of a commission of inquiry with some of the powers of a court of law. There is the caveat of course, that since the government and a senior minister are the subject of the allegations, and given the political circumstances of this land, the members of such a commission should be eminent non-Guyanese drawn from outside this country.

Dr Ramsammy’s distress is understandable; however, he too should know that the fastest way to retrieve his reputation is via a full inquiry which uncovers the truth. No one can deny he has been an energetic and conscientious minister; however, with such an enormous cloud hanging over him, he will find it difficult to discharge his functions as he has been wont to do unless he is cleared. It might be worth his while, therefore, for him to consider stepping down from his post for the duration, so a commission can have a free hand to investigate. If he has indeed been set up, that will surely be discovered following diligent investigation.