Dear Editor,

On reading the Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs’ letter, ‘The public may not be aware of all Paul Slowe’s deeds,’ (SN, June 10), I had to ask myself on what basis did the Guyana government decide to bring him back to serve in his current capacity.

I believe I have an idea what he attempted to do in his letter, but failed to achieve any way. It was as though he was on a wild-goose political mission of media spinning trying to defend the most inept and corrupt political status quo Guyana’s history, but did not do his homework in both gathering and presenting cogent facts from actual episodes to publicly humiliate outgoing Assistant Police Commissioner Paul Slowe. He did more damage to himself and his government than he did to Mr Slowe. He exposed the government for what it is: petty and vindictive.

Mr Ramson sought to state that contrary to Mr Slowe’s claim that he never took a bribe or was ever involved in any corrupt or illegal activity, that there were four instances he (Ramson) can recall that undermine Mr Slowe’s bravado.

Why would he set out to besmirch Mr Slowe’s character when Mr Slowe never said a negative word about Mr Ramson? All Mr Slowe did was provide a constructive criticism of the police force and pinpointed the friction that occurred between himself and former Home Affairs Minister, Mr Ronald Gajraj, who, by all accounts to date, still has serious question marks over his head from his period as Home Affairs Minister.

Minister Gajraj is now Ambassador Gajraj in India, while Mr Slowe is retiring and does not need to be protected from possible investigations or the glare of media spotlight on anything he did, so when Mr Ramson talks about Mr Slowe going to Region 11, Mr Ramson is engaging in rum shop conversation. It demeans even Mr Ramson given his occupational status.

But on reading Mr Ramson’s explanation of the four instances, I shook my head in disbelief that this is the kind of stuff he could have come up with for an explanation. Not only was he petty, but there was nothing in his explanation that merits the belief that Mr Slowe was anything but an exemplary officer who neither took a bribe nor engaged in corrupt or illegal activities in his 37 years as a cop. Comparing what Mr Ramson highlighted as illegal or wrong by Mr Slowe to what we have since learned about other senior police and government officials, I think Mr Slowe comes out smelling cleaner and walking taller.

By the way, only recently, when a judge openly criticized the state of the criminal justice system that has suspects on remand for prolonged periods of time without being tried, the Attorney-General retaliated in the media by being critical of the judges for their apparent slothfulness in the handling of cases. Clearly, the retaliation missed the point in the judge’s remarks, but the huge backlog of cases and few judges and magistrates to handle them all completely missed the thinking of the Attorney-General. My point here is that he seems more eager to defend the indefensible government.

Editor, rather than Mr Ramson waste his time and our time with his shallow letter, I would have preferred to read a categorical reaction from either former acting Top Cop, Mr Floyd McDonald or former Home Affairs Minister, Mr Ronald Gajraj, because some of the charges levelled by and against Mr Slowe happened on their watches. Ironically, Mr Slowe is retiring to Region 11, but Messrs McDonald and Gajraj had their visas to Region 11 revoked.

As for the Attorney-General and Legal Affairs Minister, he needs to be more scholarly and professional in his presentation of any case, even in the media for letter readers.

Yours faithfully,
Emile Mervin